DJ AM dies

[JayBruceFan]

Poor Guy

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by GIDP

The story was that the plan wasnt fit to fly I thought. Seems like a good reason to sue.

I still think its low to sue the family, as if it were their fault. The two pilots paid with their own lives. What is suing their family going to do?

[GIDP]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

I still think its low to sue the family, as if it were their fault. The two pilots paid with their own lives. What is suing their family going to do?

He wasnt suing the family though.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by GIDP

He wasnt suing the family though.

He was suing the estate of the pilots.... IE, their families. The people who got his/her stuff when they died.

[The Baumer]

I understand both views.

If the pilots had survived it would be pretty obvious that he would sue. He almost died because of their negligence. But since they died then the question becomes does that make the lawsuit redundant or meaningless? Obviously putting it in simplified terms, "he is suing the dead people's families", looks pretty crude but it could have been like a blanket lawsuit that held all parties down the line accountable (airport, airplane maker, the pilots, etc) and the pilot's death may not have been reason enough legally for them to make a special exclusion of accountability? I don't know how it works but I'm trying to think past the simplified idea that he wanted dead people's family's will money.

[GIDP]

Originally Posted by The Baumer

I understand both views.

If the pilots had survived it would be pretty obvious that he would sue. He almost died because of their negligence. But since they died then the question becomes does that make the lawsuit redundant or meaningless? Obviously putting it in simplified terms, "he is suing the dead people's families", looks pretty crude but it could have been like a blanket lawsuit that held all parties down the line accountable (airport, airplane maker, the pilots, etc) and the pilot's death may not have been reason enough legally for them to make a special exclusion of accountability? I don't know how it works but I'm trying to think past the simplified idea that he wanted dead people's family's will money.

He was simply suing the pilots. It has nothing to do with the families other than they were set to inherit things. Its not like the guy is targeting the family members earnings or life savings.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by GIDP

He was simply suing the pilots. It has nothing to do with the families other than they were set to inherit things. Its not like the guy is targeting the family members earnings or life savings.

Well, if the pilots were married, that is kind of what is going on.

[GIDP]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Well, if the pilots were married, that is kind of what is going on.

I dont see why the death of the pilots really changes anything.

[Joseph]

Originally Posted by GIDP

I dont see why the death of the pilots really changes anything.

The estate would include any life insurance and other policies that would pay the family.

With the pilots dead, there are likely children without parents now, husbands without wives or vice versa.

These people left behind get the estate as some token of their loss to help lessen that blow. If DJ AM was trying to take that away from them, he was suing the families in essence. I don't see whats so hard to understand about that. It could impact college educations for children, the ability to keep a house for these families, everything.

He wasn't suing some invisible, magical pile of money somewhere.

[GIDP]

Originally Posted by Joseph

The estate would include any life insurance and other policies that would pay the family.

With the pilots dead, there are likely children without parents now, husbands without wives or vice versa.

These people left behind get the estate as some token of their loss to help lessen that blow. If DJ AM was trying to take that away from them, he was suing the families in essence. I don't see whats so hard to understand about that. It could impact college educations for children, the ability to keep a house for these families, everything.

He wasn't suing some invisible, magical pile of money somewhere.

The pilots were getting sued no matter what. All these extra things are only brought up because the pilots died. the pilots were at fault in some fashion. I think its fair game that they get sued. Just because they died doesnt change the suit very much in my eyes.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by GIDP

The pilots were getting sued no matter what. All these extra things are only brought up because the pilots died. the pilots were at fault in some fashion. I think its fair game that they get sued. Just because they died doesnt change the suit very much in my eyes.

Except now they aren't suing the pilots, they are suing those with no direct involvement at all in the situation other than they happened to be related to the pilot. Its a bad situation, no question, but I think its just morally wrong to pursue a lawsuit going after the pilots estate. The pilots may have been at fault, but they paid for their mistakes with their own lives.

[GIDP]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Except now they aren't suing the pilots, they are suing those with no direct involvement at all in the situation other than they happened to be related to the pilot. Its a bad situation, no question, but I think its just morally wrong to pursue a lawsuit going after the pilots estate. The pilots may have been at fault, but they paid for their mistakes with their own lives.

Paid who? I see no one getting paid.

[wolfboy]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Except now they aren't suing the pilots, they are suing those with no direct involvement at all in the situation other than they happened to be related to the pilot. Its a bad situation, no question, but I think its just morally wrong to pursue a lawsuit going after the pilots estate. The pilots may have been at fault, but they paid for their mistakes with their own lives.

If a drunk smashes into your car and kills you both, is your family in the wrong if they sue the drunk driver's estate? I think it would be morally wrong for your family to have no recourse.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by wolfboy

If a drunk smashes into your car and kills you both, is your family in the wrong if they sue the drunk driver's estate? I think it would be morally wrong for your family to have no recourse.

In my opinion yes, it is wrong. In the eyes of the law? No. The law isn't always 'right' though.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by GIDP

Paid who? I see no one getting paid.

I said the pilots paid for their mistake with their lives. They made a mistake and they surely paid for it in the worst way they could.