• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
General Aviation News

General Aviation News

Because flying is cool

  • Pictures of the Day
    • Submit Picture of the Day
  • Stories
    • News
    • Features
    • Opinion
    • Products
    • NTSB Accidents
    • ASRS Reports
  • Comments
  • Classifieds
    • Place Classified Ad
  • Events
  • Digital Archives
  • Subscribe
  • Show Search
Hide Search

Lawsuit against Van’s Aircraft dismissed

By General Aviation News Staff · March 2, 2017 ·

A lawsuit filed after an RV-10 accident on the Oregon Coast in May 2014 has been dismissed, according to Van’s Aircraft officials.

The $35 million lawsuit was filed after the crash that claimed the life of the builder and his 4-year-old granddaughter. The suit alleges that the instructions for the kits and the parts provided by Van’s Aircraft and Floscan Instrument Co. “are inadequate and unsafe.”

The NTSB investigated the accident and concluded that the probable cause of the accident was:

A total loss of engine power due to fuel starvation because of a blocked fuel line that resulted from the pilot’s improper maintenance practices and the pilot’s subsequent failure to maintain adequate airspeed while attempting a forced landing, which led to the airplane exceeding its critical angle-of-attack and experiencing an aerodynamic stall.”

According to a prepared release from Van’s Aircraft, “the plaintiffs’ attorneys in this case initially chose to publicize this suit extensively, along with the claim for very high damages. We know that many of our customers and others in the aviation community have been concerned about the status of this suit for some time.”

“The crew here at Van’s would like to let everyone know that this suit was dismissed,” it continued. “Van’s own investigation of the accident concurred with the NTSB probable cause report. The complaint against Van’s had no merit.”

“The loss of life and injuries caused by this and too many other accidents are truly sad and unfortunate…and preventable,” the release concluded. “Please build and fly safely.”

Reader Interactions

Share this story

  • Share on Twitter Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook Share on Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit Share on Reddit
  • Share via Email Share via Email

Become better informed pilot.

Join 110,000 readers each month and get the latest news and entertainment from the world of general aviation direct to your inbox, daily.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Curious to know what fellow pilots think on random stories on the General Aviation News website? Click on our Recent Comments page to find out. Read our Comment Policy here.

Comments

  1. Wylbur Wrong says

    March 3, 2017 at 5:38 am

    This article demonstrates a flaw in the US Legal system. This case had no merit. Yet the defendant is unable to file a claim against the attorney for costs to defend — as I understand it, they would have to prove the case was frivolous to start with.

    If more attorneys were held liable for cases that should not be filed, we would see a large shake out of the Trial Lawyers Association.

    Just my 2 cents. But then, I’ve also had personal experience with things like this. The joys of being an officer in a company.

    • Lardo says

      March 3, 2017 at 5:57 am

      You are spot on, Wylbur. And there have been tort reform laws introduced in Congress, from time to time, that would have held these ambulance chasing lawyers accountable. Unfortunately they have failed to pass. Mostly due to the efforts of one particular party.

    • Jonathan Smith says

      December 8, 2017 at 12:13 pm

      I agree completely. And I’m a lawyer (Intellectual property). And a pilot.

© 2025 Flyer Media, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy.

  • About
  • Advertise
  • Comment Policy
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Writer’s Guidelines
  • Photographer’s Guidelines