 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Augustine v. Bell Helicopter Textron5/2/1996
This summary judgement case arises from a helicopter crash that killed two servicemen. Their widows sued the manufacturer, alleging the driveshaft failed because it was defectively designed. Because issues of fact exist on the manufacturer's government contractor defense, we reverse the trial court's summary judgement holding the manufacturer immune from liability for defective design.
The Crash and Resulting Lawsuit
In 1991, U.S. Air Force Captain John Augustine and Staff Sergeant Robert Lovell died when the UH-1N helicopter they were flying crashed near Edwards Air Force Base in California during a training exercise. Augustine was the pilot in command and Lovell was the flight engineer. Their widows, the appellants in this case, each filed suit in Tarrant County, Texas, district courts against Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc, which built the helicopter for the United States military. Their cases were consolidated.
Janet Augustine and Claudia Lovell, seeking damages for wrongful death and survival, alleged three theories of liability under Texas tort law--negligence, strict products liability, and breach of warranty--in connection with Bell's design, manufacture, assembly, inspection, testing, sale, servicing, repair, and maintenance of the helicopter, the engine, and the lubricant used on the helicopter's driveshaft.
Bell, asserting an affirmative defense, moved for summary judgment. Known as the "government contractor defense," a 1988 U.S. Supreme Court case established that government contractors are immune from liability under state law for design defects in military equipment in some situations. Boyle v. United Technologies Corp., 487 U.S. 500, 512, 108 S. Ct. 2510, 2518, 101 L. Ed. 2d 442, 458 (1988). The trial court granted Bell summary judgement on its affirmative defense.
Standard of Review
We review the summary judgement granted in this case under the nowfamiliar standard: (1) The movant for summary judgement has the burden of showing that there is no issue of material fact and that it is entitled to judgement as a matter of law; (2) in deciding whether there is a disputed material fact issue precluding summary judgment, evidence favorable to the non-movant will be taken as true; (3) every reasonable inference must be indulged in favor of the non-movant and any doubts resolved in its favor. Nixon v. Mr. Property Management Co. Inc., 690 S.W.2d 546, 548-49 (Tex. 1985). When a defendant moves for summary judgment on the basis of an affirmative defense, the movant must conclusively prove all essential elements of that defense. Swilley v. Hughes, 488 S.W.2d 64, 67 (Tex. 1972). The question on appeal is, then, did Bell establish as a matter of law its non-liability for the alleged design defects by reason of the government contractor defense.
The Government Contractor Defense
In 1983, an American military helicopter crashed off the Virginia coast during a training exercise. Although the marine co-pilot survived the crash impact, he could not escape from the helicopter and drowned. Boyle, 487 U.S. at 502, 108 S. Ct. at 2513, 101 L. Ed. 2d at 451. His family sued, alleging the company that built the helicopter was liable under state tort law for defectively designing the co-pilot's emergency escape system: the escape hatch opened out instead of in (and was therefore ineffective in a submerged craft because of water pressure), and other equipment blocked access to the escape hatch handle. Id. at 503, 108 S. Ct. at 2513, 101 L. Ed. 2d at 452.
Noting that a few fields of activity "are so committed by the Constitution and laws of the United States to federal control that state law is pre-e
Page 1 2 3 4 Texas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|