Luyster v. Textron, Inc.

266 F.R.D. 54 (S.D.N.Y. 2010)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Luyster (P) as executor and administrator of the estates of Alfred Zadow and Donna Zadow. Alfred was piloting a Cessna R18 aircraft and reported engine trouble. The aircraft crashed, resulting in the deaths of Alfred Zadow and Donna Zadow, his wife and passenger. Ps sued entities that played a role in the 'design, manufacture, assembly, inspection, testing, distribution, sale, servicing, maintenance, overhaul and/or repair of the subject engine and its component parts.' P sued Superior (D) and KS Gleitlager USA, Inc. (D). P's claims are based on theories of negligence, strict liability, and breach of warranty; P also seeks punitive damages. Prior to the subject crash, Zadow was receiving air traffic control services from air traffic controllers employed by the FAA, an agency of the Government. Zadow reported to an air traffic controller that the plane was having engine trouble and needed to land. Zadow asked for the location of the closest airport, at which time the aircraft was approximately two miles from Candlelight Farms Airport and over ten miles from Danbury Airport. The air traffic controller 'informed [Zadow] that the nearest airport was Danbury and provided instructions to fly toward Danbury, including instructions to descend.' The plane crashed approximately four miles north of the Danbury Airport when Zadow attempted to land in a sports field. KS Gleitlager (D) filed a third-party complaint against the Government (D) with the permission of the Court. Superior (D) filed a cross-claim against the Government (D), alleging that it was negligent in providing air traffic control services to [Zadow].' Superior (D) sought contribution and/or indemnification from the United States (D). The Government (D) moved to dismiss of Superior's (D) purported cross-claim because 'it is not a cross-claim, it is untimely, and for insufficiency of service.' The Government (D) asks this Court to find that the Government (D) and Superior (D) are not Coparties.