Give them the " Casino" treatment ! hole in the desert.

Another fine example of how greed takes hold of people. This was a tragic accident. And unless it is discovered that the family conspired to sabotage the plane to make it un-flyable, they should be left out of this.

I'm normally the first to jump on the "frivolous lawsuit" bandwagon but not this time. Either you have the planes fly further away from spectators or you pay for the consequences of your pilots/planes failing. These shows I'm sure carry some pretty hefty insurance....and it will be but to use.

Do I think they deserve 25 million? No, but they should get enough to help them through the tough times ahead.

These shows I'm sure carry some pretty hefty insurance....and it will be but to use.

That's my entire reason for calling this a frivolous lawsuit, please re-read the story and you'll see that the family of the pilot who was killed & the planes mechanic have been lumped into this lawsuit on top of the promoters:

The family of a Texas man killed when a racing aircraft crashed into spectators in Reno has filed $25 million lawsuit against the pilot's family, a mechanic on the World War II aircraft and the organization that hosted the event.

I agree with the family being able to file a lawsuit against the promotors, b/c like you said they have insurance, but dragging the mechanic and the pilots family into it is just disgusting and greedy.

Sono, you're absolutely right. If they were suing strictly the Reno field and the promoters, I wouldn't really care. But when you also try to bring down the family and the mechanic who are involved through no fault of their own, that's a totally different story.

You can not determine a monetray value of a parent or spouse.

If the man was a provider for the family, whatever projected income he may have provided should be replaced, by the insurance company retained to do just that.

But $25 million is the lawyer showing the stereotypical greed we expect from people in that profession.

If you can sit in the stands at the Reno air races and not feel you are in some danger as the planes fly over you, removing you from the gene pool isn't such a bad result. Races are dangerous, that's why so many people are attracted to them, it's not like they didn't already know it.

Even though this is quite a rare situation, the company that hosted this event should have made sure that the spectators were well out of range for any such injury in case of such a crash. This is just a sad and very unfortunate story. My heart goes out to all involved.

I suppose it's a wrongful death suit? Have they even finished investigating to see if it was pilot error or mechanical? Why can't something just be an accident.. I cannot begin to imagine how his family feels, but what would 25mm do.

Blake how do you protect people from a falling aircraft.. unless you are psychic you have no idea where an out of control plane will land. Its like saying your going mountain climbing and a big boulder kills you, do you get to sue the mountain? One must understand the risks in things they do. Tragic yes suable no

How could you make sure the people were out of the way at an airshow?...if something goes wrong a little jolt on a plane can make it travel 500 yards in 3 seconds. This is just another case of someone trying to cash in...next you know the pilots family will counter sue the plaintiff because her husband got in the way of the plane.

I think they should sue the person who held the gun to their heads and forced them to attend the airshow because that is the one who is truely at fault

I'm sorry, but in case you don't remember what happened in this case. They had documentation this guy did extensive modification to this airplane, and unless each modification was tested and approved then he IS RESPONSIBLE for the crash, and so is the venue since they decided not to regulate what could be done and what couldn't be done to these planes. I hope they get every penny they ask for.

Everyone is always screaming about reducing regulations here and there because we don't need them. Well regulations are suppose to be there for a reason and if you don't follow them then you should have to pay through the nose no matter what.

besides this Sezen Atug woman is a bay area gastroenterologist M.D. She's raking it in. RLC...the planes modifications were had doxumented flight approval. I havent seen it but I doubt they woulda let it fly if there was something not legit....You need to prove the facility was at fault for neglegence before you go typing it. The whole facility has to answeer to the FAA if their having a 3rd party airshow. that would cost a lot of peoples jobs not just the pilots or the show coordinators

The guy had BOX seat. He wanted to be as close to the action as possible. People don't want to sit far back where it's safe. It's why so many, I included, show up early at general admission shows to get the "best seats" (closest seats). As one poster stated, this carries inherent risks. Although I am sorry for their loss, this doc, like our country, is sue crazy.

I'd like to see all frivolous lawsuits deemed to be frivolous fined triple the courts time include triple for all defendent legal fees and $200 per hour for any time wasted by the defendent finding a lawyer, meeting with the lawyer, going to court etc. as well as a fine of $1500 payed to the defendent. The opposing counsel and their client must remain incarcerated until all fines are paid in full.

I agree, there is a risk in attending a show of this nature, and a risk in participating (such as the pilot) as well. Grief is difficult to work through, but neither the courts, nor extra money in your pocket, nor knowing that you stuck it to parties you deem responsible will do anything to ease that pain. It will only deter your ability to cope and move on. My heart goes out to everyone who was tragically affected by this incident.

To those claiming that the people who put on the show "should have made sure that the spectators were well out of range".

Yeah,, because people want to sit 2 miles away from the event and watch through binoculars. I love how people who have no idea how an airplane operates or the testing and engineering these planes go through pop up and make asinine comments.

Sqrly;

"You can't determine the value of a loved one?" Wanna bet? Check with workers compensation. You are worth exactly $125,000 max if you are killed on the job. A loved one or any part thereof is broken down into dollars and cents in the compensation tables used to settle worker comp claims.

So the old shrill of they can not be compensated for is pure fantasy. This has been determined by a department of the U.S. Government. You are the sum of you parts and that figure is $125,000 for a work place fatality. As disgusting as this sounds, You or any part of you are worth a set amount to the government. it is how Workers compensation determines pay outs for injuries and/or a fatality.

one of the things they blamed was the competition of the race, yet the man that was killed was also a racing pilot! Sounds awful hypocritical to me! I understand wanting to blame someone, but all anyone knows, the pilot might have had a heart attack before he crashed. Who's fault would that be? Gee, I want to sue everyone who voted for Lyndon Johnson for president because it was their fault that he sent me to vietnam and the reason I am a disabled vietnam vet now! You all agree with that??

I don't think that way really, it was my own fault because I enlisted and voluteered to serve! I put myself in the position for that to happen, ME no one else! Egads, people need to start taking responsiblity for what they do! Every choice one makes can have consequences, sometimes good, sometimes not so good. Like turning left or right when you go out of your driveway, it changes your future. Even staying in bed and never leaving your house can have consequences. Accidents happen!

RLC111;

Ever heard of the FAA? Federal Aviation Administration? Ring in bells? This planes, or any other plane in the U.S., don't fly without an FAA certificate of air worthiness. Since this plane was flying, it clearly had one. So why are you not holding the FAA responsible? Clearly the licensing agency in this case. Get a clue.

The problem with lawsuits like this is that an insurance will pay out the award which in turn raises EVERYBODY'S rates for the pay off.

Mr. Buzbee says " no amount of money can compensate them for the loss, but I bet $25M is going to take alot of that pain away, Especially since he gets 1/3rd or better of that, I am sorry for their loss, but Air Shows and Air Racing Events have the expectation that something can go wrong, I hope they do not get a penny and actually hope the Lawyers are fined for filing this lawsuit, If you get hit on the head with a golf ball, baseball or other object at a sporting event do you sue the person who hit it, pitched it, etc, NO !!! You accept the risk, same with this sport !!! It was an accident plain and simple. These are probably the same lawyers that file the hot coffee lawsuits. Mr. Buzbee needs to crawl under that Texas Rock he came from and go back to chasing ambulences !!!

RLC111;

Ever heard of the FAA? Federal Aviation Administration? Ring any bells? NO air craft in the United States leaves the ground with an FAA certificate of air worthiness. This includes racing planes, private, commercial, NO aircraft flies with out a certificate. Given the fact that this one was flying indicates it had one. So where is your outrage with the FFA, the licensing agency in this case. It had registration numbers hence a certificate.

No amount of regulation will prevent this sort of thing. Even if seated three miles away does not guarantee a plane won't have a failure and crash into you seat. Accident happen. Aircraft fail, clearly from the number of commercial jet crashes every year. You can step off the curb and be run over by a bus. You can wreck your car because your distracted with a phone, radio, new paper. You can't regulate every circumstance. If you want to live in a place where government does everything for you, I suggest Europe or China perhaps.

Apparently, the modifications you are yelling about past FAA muster. You know better, do you? Are you an air craft design engineer? An A&P mechanic? An aerodynamic engineer, perhaps? No? You have zero air craft experience aside from riding on a passenger jet. right? Then you really aren't qualified to speak to aerodynamic issues, do you?

you attend a racing event you accept the dangers that go along with it. So typical of the lawsuit crowd to think someone has the right to compensation because someone else did not keep them from doing/watching/attending ect something. If people were made to keep a safe distance no one would have attended. Every lawyer like this should be disbarred.

I'm really sorry for you loss, but you see accidents at airshows on the news all the time. YOu should of expected the worse if you attend an airshow. I will not go to any just because of the news videos. It terrible just terrible, but you take your risk.

How sickening. It's a wonder the family didn't hire a hitman so they could get rich quicker. Or maybe they hired a saboteur instead.

you are wrong, they deserve every penny

They do not deserve 25 million, sorry buddy.

How so youdaman? Why are they entitled to 25 million because of a freak accident that was probably beyond anyones control? People need to be held accountable for their own actions, thats a law that should be instituted because im sick and tired of these frivalous lawsuits popping up all over the place. Its because of people like this that everyone has to post ridiculous regulations and raise their costs in the event of being sued. And you know who pays for most of this? We do on the backend. Honestly where has our common sense gone? This family deserves to be stoned out of the building and flogged for not grieving like they should be for losing such a "dear" loved one as they say...just disgusting

I hope these people not only do not get a dime, but are forced to pay the court costs for everyone. I might see going after the outfit the sponsored the races, but to go after the pilot's family is disgusting. This plane had been tested and certified to fly by an independent organization. There was nothing inherently unsafe or defective about the plane or it never would have been in the air. From the film footage, it is apparent that there was no pilot error involved. The film clearly shows that the trim tab failed and that is what caused the crash. To go after the mechanic is equally as abhorrent. There has been no indication that the mechanic did anything wrong and there was an independent inspection and certification of the plane prior to the event. The people involved with this racing team and the pilot's family have suffered a huge tragedy, losing their relative/friend in this tragic crash. To add to their suffering with this ridiculous lawsuit is absolutely disgusting. You might make an argument that the spectators should have been further back and that the promoters have some responsibility, except that this guy was in a box seat, meaning he wanted to get as close to the action as possible. If they kept the spectators back from the action, no one would show up. People know there is an inherent risk in attending an event like this and this suit should be thrown out. The people filing this suit are nothing but a bunch of money grubbers looking for a payday off of this unfortunate accident and tragedy. They deserve to get stuck with the bill for everyone's legal fees and the lawyer should be charged with abuse of process for filing this frivolous suit. This was a tragic accident and to try and make money off of it is absolutely disgusting.

Give them the 25 million. Payable at the rate of 1.00 dollar per year until paid off over the next 25 million years............

Condolences go to all the people who were affected by this accident.

Now!!! Another stupid lawsuit. If the plane would have crashed into this guys house and killed him while he was watching the race on television, then yes there is some increased fault by everyone involved in the show. He purchased a higher priced ticket(pass) to be closer to the planes. You can't take risks and expect other people to pay for your lack of judgement. If i leave my keys in my car, not only will insurance not cover the lose, but in most places you can be ticketed for doing it.

Everyone is so sue happy. The Mcdonalds woman would have held up the window, if she would have received warm coffee. She would have yelled and screamed and belittled the poor person at the window. This new story about the woman filing suit against the airlines for PTSD after some turbulence. She would have been filing if they would have diverted or grounded that flight. You cannot fly in the Northeast in fall or winter without running into severe weather. Just like you can't fly in the southwest in spring or summer. Either put up with delays, diversions, or put up with the possible bad weather. and turbulence. OR RIDE THE BUS

Stop trying to get everyone else to pay for the bad outcomes from your decisions.

If you want to watch the air races from a mile away, you can. And it's free.

What we really need is for our courts to accept waivers as indisputable contracts.

So then you could sign a waiver, and then you would know the consequences.

But then lawyers don't get paid.

So they invalidate the waiver.

There is no basis in the Constitution, or law to invalidate an un-coerced waiver. They just make this stuff up out of thin air and we swallow it like morons.

Once again, the legal system creates the problem instead of solving it.

i'm above arguing with people that say "they took a risk and died, so screw them"

so i'll just leave it as "you are all wrong"

Make the law suit as it is anything but frivolous.

However to all the empty heads that say its frivolous, make sure all or any of THEIR possible future lawsuits are thrown out and as stamped frivolous.

Personally I doubt even that will educate them about anything.

Many times tickets to these state the ticket holder assumes all risks adherent to attendance of the event.

All the people have to do is read the ticket. on the back there is a disclaimer.

Sorry for their loses, but 25 million?? give me a break.

They paid for a high priced ticket to get closer to the plane, and guess what you cant take the thrill out of the people.

Now someone dies and now everything gone to hell.

Read the disclaimer on the ticket, stating that you know the risk when you bought the ticket.

Sorry but what done is done. You lost, they wont get a DIME.

how does anyone knows if the plane going to fail??

So the pilot going to counter sue them for being to close to the field where he crashed?? hmmmmm to many variables

Youdaman;Your comment caused me extreme confusion, not to mention a violent bout of zuking, I therefore am looking for a lawyer..........

i'm above arguing with people that say "they took a risk and died, so screw them"

First people pointing out that his family shouldn't be entitled to $25 million as a result of this accident....is simply not the same as saying, "they took a risk and died, so screw them".

That's absurd.

Second, are you really "above" it...or simply incapable of countering the reality of the risk he accepted with a salient, thoughtful, or cogent response?

so i'll just leave it as "you are all wrong"

LOL...good idea!! Anyone who feels that a difference of opinion or a simple question constitutes an argument...is probably safer sticking with a monologue than attempting dialogue!

However to all the empty heads that say its frivolous, make sure all or any of THEIR possible future lawsuits are thrown out and as stamped frivolous.

Worst. Logic. Ever.

Nicodemus: "This planes, or any other plane in the U.S., don't fly without an FAA certificate of air worthiness." 1.19. " NO air craft in the United States leaves the ground with an FAA certificate of air worthiness."1.22. I take it that your slightly confused! Where is it that the pilot does,or doesn't put the nonexistant certificate of non-airworthyness to make sure that the airplane is .........WHAT!!!?????

Once again, the greed of attorneys seeks to eliminate another staple of entertainment. Anyone who goes to the Reno races is heavily into avation, usually a pilot and would never want a suit like this to be pressed. Whatever happened to people accepting life at their own risk? In my hometown where I grew up we used to ice skate on the lake at the public park. Then the lawyers got involved and now no one can skate. All must suffer for the greed of a few. This litigious society we live in is a joke. As to the clowns here crying, "It's not a frivolous lawsuit!", go pound sand. Sheep like you are why attorneys and insurance companies are wealthy while the average person can't even find a playground for their children anymore (too expensive to insure). When I moved here to FL, I couldn't believe how poorly the young, new drivers performed on the road. Of course, there isn't any driver's education for the kids anymore (too expensive to carry the insurance). Even the road test is conducted in a damn parking lot for similar reasons. There's a reason why in every revolution, the lawyers are among the first to be lined up against the wall and shot! (OK, kidding with that last line.)

Let's see here. Very old and highly-modified airplane. Very old pilot. Very old pilot and airplane fly over people who we are told KNOW a negative outcome was inevitable. That is their word - INEVITABLE.

They gambled in Nevada and lost. INEVITABLE.

Sorry, but you don't know what you're talking about, David.

Darrel, I completely agree with you. Heavily modified airplanes flying at twice the speed they were designed to withstand, what could possibly go wrong? Spectators volunteered to go there (and payed for it). People want the thrill from being as close as possible to the action, and that obviously comes with some risks. If you cannot face the consequences of your actions, stay home. What happened to personal responsibility? There should be some compensations payed by the insurance of the organizers, but a lawsuit?

Not to bleed money from the pilot's family. From their insurance company. If insurance weren't so prevalent in our society, lawsuits would virtually disappear in cases like this - because the chance of collecting anything would be far less than the cost of filing the suit. It's not lawyers ruining this country. It's insurance companies and accountants.

Miker.. if the courts wouldn't allow every tom,dick and harry to sue for whatever floats their boat.. insurance companies wouldn't even come into play.

I just broke my finger nail typing.. really low little blood.. I'm due the PC maker for emotion distress.. all my nails aren't the same length now.

I REALLY hope that the tickets had a liability disclaimer on them. That would shut this lawsuit down pretty quickly. This is just typical greed coming out.

People, wake the hell up... You KNOW you are going somewhere that could be dangerous... If the NTSB comes out and says that the crash was the pilot's FAMILY that caused the accident, sure, go right ahead and sue them.. Otherwise, they're suffering just as you are.

I think what's terrible about it, is that she's going after the family; as if the family purposely went out of their way to kill her husband. She sounds like one of those people who take a tragedy and try to profit off of it and since they hurt, they don't care who they hurt in the process.

Darrel, I agree that including the pilot's family in the lawsuit is painfully ridiculous. The pilot's family also suffered a great loss.

When a wrongful death lawsuit is filed, the attorneys typically include every possible person or company involved to make sure they can recover the maximum award. Even if the pilot wasn't heavily insured (doubtful!), he and his estate would still have been named. Why? Because the attorney probably feels strongly the suit will be settled and everyone involved will be held to a determined % of responsibility. He also knows that the $25M is likely to be greatly reduced by either the jury OR mediation. Filing with a high start amount leaves more room for negotiations.

So the attorney did what every other attorney would have done...and that's to inlcude the pilot (his family/estate) in the suit. It doesn't make it right and that's exactly why most folks have such a low opinion of attorneys.

And @ Miker, I strongly disagree and think you have it backwards. Yes, the insurance companies are powerful. But it is the attorneys who file mega milliion dollar lawsuits against the insurance companies that is the real problem. This is not the chicken vs. the egg argument. If they weren't making such a good living on their insurance settlements, they wouldn't be filing the suits in the first place.

Darrel, I too agree. Why sue the pilot's family? It's ridiculous. The NTSB hasn't even finished its investigation, and already the ambulance chasing lawyers are it! No wonder that famous quote from Shakespeare's Henry VI is often said about lawyers.

The pilot did modify the plane before this air show. Is there documentation to prove that the modifications were all inspected and found to be working properly? Any kind of disclaimer on the tickets to the air show or posted at the air show site? What about any logs with maintenance, etc? It's all going to factor in with this lawsuit.

The pilot's family? YES. He was flying the plane at AGE 74, and it was a family business. Doesn't matter if it was an accident or not. If I accidently kill someone, I go to jail. Since you can't jail dead people, you try to get justice monetarily, since there is no other way to do it. You people are amazing. If someone in your family was killed, you'd be right up there with your own lawyer, suing for something to take the pain away too.

so i guess thats it then? there was risk involved so screw all the people that got killed? get the F outta here...

So we should sue the manufacturers of motorcycles and the states that issued the license every time some dies in an accident. They knew they were making or promoting a dangerous product.

Can we sue the state ever time someone get bit by a shark. The state knows there are sharks in the waters. Why allow people to swim?

And this time of year, we should sue walmart and all the sellers and makers of portable heaters. Do you know how dangerous they are? How many people die every year not because of participating in risky behavior, but trying to keep their families warm.

Noone goes to races to see races, they go to see the near misses and crashes. Guess what? You got what you came for.

That's why they are modified.

I would still take my chances.. those shows are amazing!!!! Risk/Reward to me the reward far outways the risk

LR Lucas as Sqrly said they are modified, the modification include strengthening and upgrading the original materials, most of these racing planes are FAA inspected for flight worthyness and held to standards used for experimental craft. In addition a lot of these planes and pilots are part of corporations. In NASCAR racing do we see lawsuits against the driver's or Owners- Not usually and these are considered "modified" Racing in any form is dangerous for both spectator and driver.

Agreed, the money won't bring them back, it wasn't intentional and if you are too ignorant to know an inherent risk you don't deserve any legal rights.

I didn't see any warning label in large print on the front of this container of ajax saying I shouldn't use it to scrub the red out of my eyes - I deserve money from someone smart enough or ambitious enough to make money.

Who are you to determine what these people feel. You are nothing but a troll.

justsayin, I am sure these people have a feeling of loss, but to sue the mechanic and pilot makes them look like only greedy, not bareaved. As my previous posts have said do you sue the driver or mechanic if an accident happens at a NASCAR race? Probably not !!! unless you are greedy !!!

The point that isn't being considered by a lot of these comments, the planes were modified. This should have referenced the original story because it was admitted that the modification he did was risky. In this case I can see the mechanic being named in the suit.

They can't sue the family unless they were somehow involved. Any assets the pilot had would be fair game but don't name the wife and kids in the suit.

This leaves the promoters which I believe are fair game unless this pilot was severely off course there wasn't enough done to protect the spectators. I'm sure the lower row seats at a NASCAR event don't like looking through a chain link fence but it is there to protect the crowd. To have the course fly directly over the spectators is completely irresponsible and a "Film at 11" moment just waiting to happen.

As for 25 million. If the lawyer takes a conservative 33% and lets say the dead husband had another 30 years of employment left that would pay the family a little over $558,000 a year. I highly doubt the guy made that kind of money. To gain 100,000 dollars a year the lawsuit would be approximately 4 million with the lawyer still getting 33% of the settlement.

I think that amount would also cover pain and suffering. The lawyer is shooting for 25 million hoping the courts or insurance company will settle for 10-15 which is still too high.

Race cars are modified, too, BB. So are far more cars on the street than you'd ever know. Life is an assumed risk.

Most, if not all, litigators will bring in as many parties as they possibly can at the start of a lawsuit. As discovery starts, and continues, some of the parties to the lawsuit get dropped from the lawsuit. It is a strategy so that when it comes to negotiating, you get your client(s) some kind of compensation.

As long as they are at it, why not sue all the decendents of Orville and Wilber Wright for inventing the airplane to begin with? If they had never invented planes the accident never would have happened! And sue the plane manufactor, and the company that made the engine and the company that made the tires on the plane. Oh, and while they are at it, sue the men that mined the ore that was used to make the aluminum and the company that made it. Sue everyone!!!

Oh yeah, don't forget to sue Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan while you're at it. Because if they didn't start WW2, the P51 (the plane that crashed) probably wouldn't have been built and made such an importance that people feel the need to have it flown around in airshows.

There are lawsuits that go after "the best able to pay". IE: skiing accident a few years back in Colorado I think. The "injured party's family" went after manufacturers of the boots and skis being used, the owner of the ski lift, the operator of the ski lift, the owners and operators of the lodge where the event was hosted and even against the manufacturers of the ski poles used,for several million bucks and the "injured party only spent a couple of weeks in the hospital. I know it sounds stupid but somebody will do it and at times some bleeding heart judge will award tremendous payouts.

yes BB they were modified, SO WHAT!!!

The ticket states they can be injured from falling debris. even if it was a Ultralight plane, a penny falling from the empire state building can cause major damage, do you sue the building owner??? course not.

regardless the ticket patron knew the risk, just money hungry lawyer here.

Wow. You just made this country and our litigious society sound even worse than it already seemed.

Basically your position is that we wouldn't implement safety features without being coerced into doing so by the threat of a multi-million dollar lawsuit should something go wrong. Thus, we have clothes irons which come with instructions warning you not to use the product while wearing the actual clothes you want ironed. . . And coffee cups warning us that the contents "may" be hot.

I can guarantee you that as someone who has been to law school and worked in the legal field briefly that 30 minutes would not be nearly enough time for you and F. Lee Bailey working together to convince me that "legal action is a positive outcome."

You do realize that this isn't the first air show accident that ended with spectator(s) death, don't you?

Basically you guys want an exciting race that the spectators only see on TV. Its to dangerous to be within 5 miles of an Air Race.

Ridiculous, if all sporting events were 100% safety guaranteed then they wouldn't be worth attending.

So either cancel them all or live with it...

... and it's because of people like you that an idiot can break a bottle of liquid in a grocery store, step in it and then sue the store for a slip and fall injury. People like you are the cause for half of the inflation seen in this county due to EVERY company on the planet having to cover itself from what is typically a fraudulent claim.

I'll give you 5 days, and I bet I can do a better job convincing people that litigation is a major cause for the economic situation this country is in.

"They are about getting laws enacted / changed to protect others lives in the future."

In this scenario, what law? That spectators have to be kept in at a very safe and far distance? Then it ruins the point of being at an airshow. Or they can no longer fly WW2 planes? What if it has been a Vietnam-era plane? How far would you want spectators to be because planes can over any visual distances awfully fast.

There are risks when you attend an airshow. Same thing when you attend a baseball game. There is a probability that a ball would fly toward you and smack you on the head, causing cerebral damage and possibly death. You baseball fans can tell me how fast a baseball can go, right? So according to your thinking process, should we put safety nets all between the diamond field and the audience to prevent lawsuits in the first place? Same difference as you say.

And the probability of something like this happening are quite low because an airplane requires a lot of skilled maintenance. I remember in Boeing, the possibility of mechanical failure has to be very very small, even 1 out of a 1000 isn't acceptable. But...things happen.

You are obviously not a fan of free choice. Protect people from themselves, dumb down everything, never give anyone the choice of doing what they want and how they want if YOU happen to think it too dangerous. Lawsuit legislation is not by the people or for the people. You have no clue as to what it means to actually be free.

Oh, come on, people. You all know you've always secretly wanted to eat a packet of dessicant. If there wasn't a "Do Not Eat" warning on there, you'd be gobbling them down even as I write this.

Just so you know,dessicant won't hurt you, you can eat it if you want,the choice is your own responsibility. Please don't quote me on this,as I really don't care......

I taught English in Russia throughout the 90's. Let me tell you something about Russians. They will detonate a German WW2 era bomb 3 blocks from a school and not evac that school. I know, I was teaching in that school when this happened. I am all for a society free of Government interference. But sometimes Adults are just not very smart. Moving those VIP box seats further away is just smart sense. And at some point, a Judge will make a ruling on that. I would even question if the insurance rep for the company that underwrote the policy for that event still has a job. I know if I were his boss I wouldn't be too happy. You guys really seem surprised by my words but the facts still remain. Lawsuits will happen and will continue to happen with or without my or your opinions. That's a fact. I know it, you know it. I am not re-inventing the wheel here. The point I was making is, why sugar coat it and be angry. Face it and try and put this as much in a positive light as possible. It really is your only option. Had this been China, those dozen plus people would have been without any recourse whatsoever. At least here in American, flawed or not, people will be able to pick up the pieces, hopefully, and provide a life for themselves, their kids, continue to pay their medical bills, etc. I can assure you that in most of the world when accidents like this happen, the fallout is such that people just simply have nothing and have to start over from scratch. Remember this. What if the shoe was on the other foot? Unlike you, I've asked myself this question. All of you are so quick to talk badly about this lawsuit but I'm guessing that had this been your family, ALL OF YOU would have also hired a Law Firm to rep your interests. Always be honest with yourselves. Remember that.

Generally speaking, when you're dead your medical bills cease to accumulate. When you die quickly, say, by being hit by an airplane falling out of the sky at 500 mph, the medical bills don't have much of a chance to accumulate and usually include just the cost of picking up a few body parts and hauling them to a funeral home.

What usually ensures that the survivors can "pick up the pieces (poor choice of words on your part), proivde a life for themselves, " etc. is having life insurance. Not suing everybody for everything under the sun.

Pretty presumtuous and arrogant of you to state that we haven't asked ourselves what we'd do in that situation - which just further erodes the credibility of your position. I actually HAVE asked myself that question. Which is precisely why I DO have life insurance.

Earlier articles and news reports stated the pilot himself had concerns over the modifications of the plane. He basically said he didn't have concerns about reaching speed but I don't think he was happy with the way it would operate. If that was the case, he and the mechanic(s) were negligent if flying the plane at this event if they were not sure it was safe. Yes, things can happen, but this guy was concerned before he took off. Perhaps it was he who was greedy and took the chance for the money he would receive. Very sad all around.

It was a race. Races are always done with equipment at the edge, or you don't win. If you go to watch a race, you assume the risks.

I can make every race perfectly safe.......and boring!!!

FLash, I believe you are wrong there.. What he said was that he didn't know if the modifications made to the plane would achieve their desired results. That is not the same about having concerns for the safety of the plane..

No he didn't. What he said was that he didn't know if the modifications made to the plane would achieve their desired results. If he didn't think the plane would fly at all without crashing into the ground, it's ludicrous to assume he would have gotten into the aircraft in the first place.

What he said was that they had not tested it properly as they did not have the time and that he was not sure how it would preform and that he would see with the rest of us.

he didn't know if the modifications made to the plane would achieve their desired results.

As I said (quoted above - again). Pretty much the same as "not sure how it would preform (sic)."

Your a moron, quoting from moron text I would think. Not the same at all, try watching the interview before mouthing off.

Yes, name-calling is a very intelligent way to convince people that you're right. Well done! (And, by the way, wrong. Again.) But, you're probably just pissed because, in your effort to come off sounding so smart, you misspelled "perform" and "you're." Making yourself sound more like a moron than anything else you've said.

Speaking of morons, what moron would get in an aircraft not having some reasonable belief that it was airworthy? Again, he didn't say he didn't mean that he didn't know whether the plane would fly. What he said was that he had no idea whether the modification would make it fly faster. Try learning to read or listen for meaning before YOU mouth off, instead of just listening to the pretty sounds of the individual words.

LOL, name calling seems to be your stripe. Watch the interview then babble.

Seen it. And, more importantly, understood it. Go get your pilots license, preferably commercial with instrument rating to put us on the same level. Then work for a couple of racing teams. Then run your mouth.

(BTW, while you actually typed "your (sic) a moron," at no point have I called you a name. You may want to carefully re-read my comment before you make a total ass of yourself.)

Look quite harassing me, your full of yourself and to no reason. So your a pilot, that makes you one of millions and not a expert on anything be sides running your mouth and maybe how to spell some words, lol. The guys interview proves that there was negligence as far as I could see, you dont take an unproven plane up in a race like that and say you hope it will work out. Now please find someone else to bother.

Harassing you? If you can't take the heat of having your very questionable position questioned in a public forum, perhaps you should think about your position before you type it. I'd rather be full of myself than full of crap. The pilot did NOT say that he didn't know that his aircraft was airworthy as you assert, which makes your assertion much closer to negligent than anything the pilot did or said. Now, please go find a topic that you might actually have some knowledge of to comment on.

YA YA YA. Same crap as you have been spouting all along. Get the facts straight then start yapping, lol. The more noise you make does not make you right. Try looking at the interview instead of reading and posting third party comments.

Again, kid, I SAW the interview. And, again, I - unlike you - understood what was being said. Instead of blabbering on about things about which I have no direct knowledge. You might want to consider watching that interview again. . .

Well, no. On second thought, you probably wouldn't want to watch it again. Because you'd only feel like a total ass afterwards. Instead of just looking like one, as you do now. Later.

Your worldly knowledge has me cringe. Get a life and you wont feel the need. Did you know that if you dont talk people wont know for certain that your stupid?

That's excellent advice, young man. You should consider taking it.

As a corollary, when you can't spell, not typing will also help you conceal the fact that you're stupid. Now, off to bed for you. School day tomorrow. Not that you haven't been schooled plenty today.

Boy, someone has gotten his panties in a twist, lol.

your an ass

you seem really intelligent........lets see if the courts award them something....there is NO DOUBT in my mind

Reno? Why is this man an ass? I don't agree the family should be compensated but he makes a statement and you criticize him. That in fact, makes you the ass.

Also, its you're.....not your, thats the possesive form of the word.

Also,,, it's "man's" not "mans". If you're going to criticize grammer at least get YOURS right. LOL

If you go running wit hthe bulls is there an "expectation of safety"? If I'm sitting in my backyard, I have that expectation. If I'm sitting a few hundred yards from planes going 250mph, I do not.

then you're a fool for being there

and by the way its mans' not man's..........

seriously, you are dumb. the people in the crowds go to the event fully knowing the risk of what they are doing.

sure, if people really thought they might well be killed there would be NO ONE at the show.......well maybe you would be there alone......

it's not mans'. Mans is plural so it would be men's. It is indeed man's....

Unless I go someplace where there is armed security, there is not any expectation of safety.

Mike you have a good point, the family should be compensated, and I am sure they will be by an insurance policy, But why sue the Pilot, Mechanic, etc. all they are looking for is a big payout and a hunk of public sympathy. You attend a racing event, you do so acknowledging the risks, Odds are nothing is going to happen, but you know something can, you have accepted the risk, if you don't then don't purchase special tickets that put you in harms way!!! As I have stated before, if you go to a NASCAR event and the car flips over the fence and injures or kills you, do you or your family sue the Driver and Mechanic- NO !!! unless you are looking to gain fame and are greedy. THe article doesn't say whether the family has already been offered compensation or not, but my bet is they have already been given an offer and have refused it because they think they can get more by suing everyone and anyone involved. I go to air shows and races knowing that an accident can occur and I could be wiped off this earth, it does not stop me because I enjoy watching these events, I prefer to be near the action and feel the vibrations, smell the fuel and hear the raw power, if not I would stay home and watch on TV.

Reno; everyone has an ass,your's seems larger than most......

Actually the negligence of his company cost my father his life when I was 12.. Did we sue? No.. No matter how much money we could have gotten, it would never bring him back.. The same for this woman.

And sitting in my house and having a plane fall out of the sky into it is NOT the same as choosing to attend a dangerous sporting event, and paying EXTRA to sit that close.. He knew the risks...

I understand the loss of the family, it's horrible...I lost a child 9 months ago, I agree there should be some compensation, but 25 million is excessive.

Your post is very confusing...

You all should be quiet.

Yet you should be able to speak?

Walk in their shoes for one day and you can have an opinion.

So presumably you have walked in their shoes so your opinion is OK?

It took out her whole family!

No it didn't. You should reread the story.

There should be no more risk there than if a plane fell out of the sky on your house today.

At an air show where they race at 500 mph 20 feet off the ground 50 yards from hundreds of spectators? Are you serious?

You all would do the same thing, however the opportunity has never presented itself to you thank God.

You tell people they can't speak unless they walk in the shoes of the people in the story...and now you tell people what they would do if they walked in their shoes?

Ugh...

Mike I have been in their shoes, I had an Uncle killed in a plane crash, The family took the settlement offered and were paid, others involved suing for huge awards are still fighting it out and those that are not ended up settling for less than was originally awarded and offered and this is 30+ years later. My family took the money used it wisely and it is now worth 100x the original settlement. It never brought my Uncle back, and it in no way represented his earning potential, but by settling there was closure, The only one that will win is the lawyer.

How does expecting the people who participate in the sport to accept the risk inherent in that sport equate to being "an a-hole" or not caring who dies?

The man who died in this case was a racing pilot himself and he knew the risks. Nothing about the Reno Air Show or any other air show is secret, and I would go one step further and speculate that the very reason these people enjoy the sport is directly tied to the risk involved.

You seem really angry, which I find strange. I have nothing to do with airplane racing and the lawsuit smacks of opportunism to me....a way to ruin something for everyone so you can get a few million bucks. You tell me who is the winner and who is the loser in that transaction...

I have no ties to either party, but I will come down in favor of the side who chooses a risky hobby and their right to make that choice over some woman who wants to establish that inherent risk in that hobby as a basis for a multi-million dollar payout for herself.

Talk about heartless and selfish...

The issue here is that the modifications on the plane rendered it unstable and likely contributed to it being more dangerous to fly.

Everyone isn't as greedy as they are, or you. I lost my father, brother and an Uncle in World War Two; who do I get to sue?

Loan Doc, nowhere in the article does it mention that the modifications caused this crash, we assume that is the case, but no determination has been made as of yet, it could very well be an unmodified part of the plane such as fuel line, piece of rubber tire or other part could have caused the plane to become un -airworthy, Look at the SST crash, cause was a metal strip on the runway shredding a tire, It was an accident.

The messenger arc, you really take the cake, yes you hit the nail on the head and you are an A--hole of the highest degree, most people are not disputing that the family should get money, it is the way and the amount that bothers them. As I have said in previous posts, this makes the family look extremely greedy not bereaved. I am sure there is insurance involved and the family should either take what is offered or negotiate, not sue everyone and their mother involved to see if they can get an astronomical sum. No amount of money is going to bring this man back !! and I do feel for their loss, but he as a racing pilot would know all to well the risks that attending the event could present, I have also said anyone who attends an air show, car race, boat race, etc. can choose not to purchase a ticket in the "special seating" that puts them at the most risk, no one thinks when they attend this type of event that anything is going to happen, odds are nothing will happen, but those same people do know that something can happen and accept the risk. If I go to a NASCAR race and the car flips and lands in the stands, I don't sue the driver or his mechanic, same goes here. The article does not mention a cause for the accident yet and it is still under investigation, So suing the family of the pilot and his mechanic seems a little premature. So I am hoping you go home and slip on a banana in your kitchen so you can sue yourself or family for leaving it there, or better yet sue the banana company for not warning you that you could slip.