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
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
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- 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
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
How Secure Is the AI System Your Law Firm Is Using?
In a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.
COVID-19 and Lease Negotiations: Early Termination Provisions
During the COVID-19 pandemic, some tenants were able to negotiate termination agreements with their landlords. But even though a landlord may agree to terminate a lease to regain control of a defaulting tenant's space without costly and lengthy litigation, typically a defaulting tenant that otherwise has no contractual right to terminate its lease will be in a much weaker bargaining position with respect to the conditions for termination.
Pleading Importation: ITC Decisions Highlight Need for Adequate Evidentiary Support
The International Trade Commission is empowered to block the importation into the United States of products that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights, In the past, the ITC generally instituted investigations without questioning the importation allegations in the complaint, however in several recent cases, the ITC declined to institute an investigation as to certain proposed respondents due to inadequate pleading of importation.
The Power of Your Inner Circle: Turning Friends and Social Contacts Into Business Allies
Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.
Authentic Communications Today Increase Success for Value-Driven Clients
As the relationship between in-house and outside counsel continues to evolve, lawyers must continue to foster a client-first mindset, offer business-focused solutions, and embrace technology that helps deliver work faster and more efficiently.