Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Fed. Ct. Dismisses Film Companies' GA Suit over Plane Crash

By Greg Land
October 01, 2018

A federal judge in Atlanta dismissed a complaint filed by four movie-production companies hoping to dodge liability for a fatal plane crash tied to the filming of the Tom Cruise picture American Made. Cross Creek Pictures LLC v. S&S Aviation Inc., 1:2017cv3440.

In dismissing the lawsuit, in which the production companies want to push liability onto the Georgia company responsible for the aircraft's maintenance, Judge Michael Brown of the Northern District of Georgia emphasized that the underlying litigation is currently playing out in California. “And no one knows what the outcome of that case will be,” Judge Brown wrote. “No one can say if it is likely, unlikely, probable or improbable that plaintiffs will be liable.”

American Made starred Cruise as Barry Seal, a onetime TWA pilot who turned to drug and gun-smuggling for the Medellin Cartel. Seal was recruited by the Drug Enforcement Agency during the 1980s to try to capture cocaine kingpin Pablo Escobar.

The underlying suit is one of several actions filed in California and Georgia after the twin-engine Smith Aerostar 600 crashed in the Andes in September 2015 when it ran into bad weather flying from Santa Fe de Antioquia, Colombia, to Medellin, Colombia. The pilot Carlos Berl was killed along with Alan Purwin, a co-owner of Heliblack, the company that owned the plane. Jimmy Garland, CEO of the maintenance company S&S Aviation Inc. was seriously injured.

Berl and Purwin's families filed separate wrongful death suits in Los Angeles County Superior Court naming Cross Creek Pictures, Imagine Entertainment, Quadrant Pictures and Vendian Entertainment. Those are the same production companies in the Georgia federal lawsuit dismissed by Judge Brown.

The film production companies sued S&S in Georgia's Northern District last year, claiming the company failed to properly inspect and maintain the aircraft or to provide adequate instruction to the pilot. The plaintiffs sought total indemnity for any legal fees and potential judgments or awards in the California litigation.

S&S sought to have the claims dismissed, arguing they were not ripe for adjudication, because “the outcome of this case depends on the outcome of at least one underlying state court action pending in California, which addresses the same issues as those in this case and which has been pending and hotly litigated” there.

Judge Brown agreed in his court opinion and noted that another lawsuit the production companies filed against Heliblack in Gwinnett County was dismissed in June “because plaintiffs had not yet been found liable in the California action.”

“Although that case is on appeal, at least for now, it appears plaintiffs cannot bring a state claim for indemnification before actual liability arises from a judgment or settlement,” Judge Brown wrote. He further noted: “The dismissal of the Gwinnett County action, though not binding on this court, supports this Court's conclusion that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction because plaintiffs' claims are not justiciable.”

The plaintiffs are represented by Catherine Banich and Donald Anderson of Taylor English Duma in Atlanta.

S&S is represented by Andrew King and Ted Lavender III of FisherBroyles in Atlanta, and Arthur Hankin, Elaine Solomon and Ethan Simon of Blank Rome in Philadelphia.

*****

Greg Land is a Reporter for The Daily Report, an ALM Atlanta-based sibling publication of Entertainment Law & Finance.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers Image

In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

CoStar Wins Injunction for Breach-of-Contract Damages In CRE Database Access Lawsuit Image

Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.