Summary
**Federal Tort Claims Act – Mid-Air Collision – Contributory Negligence – Administrative Claim Notice – Damages** The Fifth Circuit affirmed summary judgment that pilots were not contributorily negligent, holding that the government failed to produce evidence of any pilot's breach of the duty to see and avoid under FAR 91.67(a). The court reversed summary judgment dismissing wrongful death claims of the surviving wife and daughter of pilot Williams, ruling that the executor's administrative claim form satisfied the jurisdictional notice requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a) even though it did not strictly comply with 28 C.F.R. § 14.3(e). The court vacated most loss-of-love-and-affection awards for lack of specific factual findings, except it reduced a $500,000 award for loss of a five-year-old daughter to $250,000, and it modified economic loss awards to exclude speculative promotion income, a company van benefit, post-accident psychological care (under Louisiana law), and unsubstantiated bartering income.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the administrative claim form filed by the executor of the Williams estate satisfied the jurisdictional notice requirements of the Federal Tort Claims Act for the claims of the surviving wife and daughter.
- Whether the district court erred in granting summary judgment against the United States on the issue of pilot contributory negligence.
- Whether the district court's damage awards for loss of love and affection and pecuniary losses were proper.
Holdings
- The administrative claim form submitted by the Bank provided sufficient written notice to the agency to commence investigation and placed a value on the claim, thus satisfying the jurisdictional notice requirements of § 2675(a). The Bank's failure to comply with 28 C.F.R. § 14.3(e) is not a jurisdictional bar.
- The government failed to produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that pilot Ahart breached his duty to see and avoid other aircraft. The summary judgment was proper.
- The government failed to produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that pilot Williams breached his duty to see and avoid or his duty to comply with cloud clearance requirements. The summary judgment was proper.
- The awards for loss of love and affection for the husbands and for the children (except the daughter's award) were vacated because the district court failed to provide specific findings and justification. The award for the daughter's loss was reduced to $250,000.
- The award for loss of company van was stricken; the award for psychological care was reversed; the award to Mrs. Ahart was reduced by the amount awarded to the former wife; the award for lost bartering income was reversed.
Key quotations
“A claim is properly presented within the meaning of Sec. 2675(a) when the agency is given sufficient written notice to commence investigation and the claimant places a value on the claim.” (at 32)
“When a motion for summary judgment demonstrates the absence of evidence as to a material fact on which the nonmovant will bear the burden of proof at trial, the nonmovant must come forward with evidence which would be sufficient to enable it to survive a motion for directed verdict at trial.” (at 54)
“The loss of a loved one is not measurable in money. Human life is, indeed priceless. Yet the very purpose of the lawsuit for wrongful death is to fix damages in money for what cannot be measured in money's worth.” (at 98)
Factual background
Two airplanes, a Piper Navaho and a Cessna Skymaster, collided in mid-air near Addison, Texas on October 27, 1982. The Piper was descending toward Dallas Love Field under instrument flight rules (IFR), receiving radar vectors from the Dallas-Fort Worth Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON). The Cessna had just departed Addison Airport under visual flight rules (VFR). The collision occurred at about 2250 feet above mean sea level, three miles northwest of Addison Airport. The district court found that the air traffic controller failed to keep the Piper within the proper descent corridor established by a Letter of Agreement, or to coordinate the Piper's descent outside the corridor with Addison Tower, and held the United States liable.
Procedural history
The district court granted partial summary judgment against the United States on pilot contributory negligence and against the Williams estate on administrative claim. After bench trial, judgment entered against United States. These appeals and cross-appeals followed.
Remand instructions
The claims of Williams' widow and daughter are remanded for further proceedings. The damage awards for loss of love and affection for the husbands and for Ahart's children are remanded for reconsideration with specific findings.