Langenbau v. Med-Trans Corp.
| Decision Date | 08 March 2016 |
| Docket Number | No. C13–3038–LTS,C13–3038–LTS |
| Citation | 167 F.Supp.3d 983 |
| Parties | Jay W. Langenbau, Administrator of the Estate of Shelly R. Lair-Langenbau, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Med-trans Corporation, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa |
Anita Porte Robb, Gary C. Robb, Robb & Robb, LLC, Kansas City, MO, John P. Lander, Brown, Kinsey, Funkhouser & Lander, PLC, Mason City, IA, for Plaintiff.
Alex Joseph Whitman, Gary Don Swaim, Cunningham Swaim, LLP, Martin E. Rose, Rose Walker, LLP, Dallas, TX, Roland Peddicord, Peddicord, Wharton, Spencer & Hook, Des Moines, IA, for Defendant.
LEONARD T. STRAND
, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On January 2, 2013, an air ambulance helicopter crashed in central Iowa just minutes after takeoff. At the time of the crash, weather forecasts for the area included a potential for icing conditions, in which the helicopter was not certified to fly. All three members of the helicopter crew—a pilot, a nurse, and a paramedic—were killed in the crash. The survivors of the nurse have brought this case, involving negligence claims, against the owner and operator of the air ambulance service. This case, which was reassigned to me on March 1, 2016, is now before me on various evidentiary motions for purposes of pending motions for partial summary judgment1 and a jury trial, set to begin on June 6, 2016. Somewhat more specifically, the plaintiffs have requested that the jury be allowed to view the wreckage of the helicopter, and both the plaintiffs and the defendant have filed motions challenging certain testimony of experts and other witnesses.
This statement of facts is not intended to encompass all of the parties' factual allegations in support of and resistance to their motions for partial summary judgment. Rather, it is intended to state only sufficient facts about the circumstances giving rise to this lawsuit to put in context the parties' evidentiary disputes.
On January 2, 2013, plaintiffs' decedent, Shelly Lair–Langenbau, was a nurse on an air ambulance helicopter crew stationed at Mercy Medical Center in Mason City, Iowa (Mercy). The pilot of the helicopter was Gene Grell, and the third member of the crew was a paramedic. The helicopter was owned and operated by defendant Med–Trans Corporation. Med–Trans operates a national air ambulance service, which utilizes helicopters stationed at various bases throughout the country. Med–Trans has various communications centers, staffed by communications specialists–not pilots or other aviation specialists–to receive requests for service and direct them to the appropriate bases.
On the evening in question, the Med–Trans communications center in Lubbock, Texas, received a request for air ambulance service from Palo Alto County Hospital, in Emmetsburg, Iowa. The communications center passed the request to the helicopter crew at Mercy. Grell, as the pilot, was charged under applicable Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs), including FAR § 135.617(c), published at 14 C.F.R. § 135.617(c)
, with conducting a preflight risk analysis and preflight risk analysis worksheets before accepting the request for service. Grell had received training from Med–Trans on the FARs and preflight risk assessment, including weather-related assessments, such as consideration of potential icing conditions.
The parties agree that there was a potential for icing conditions in the area at the time of the request for service; that Grell was, or should have been, aware of the weather conditions; that Grell was required to analyze that information and conduct a risk assessment before agreeing to accept the flight; and that the Bell Model 407 helicopter that the crew would be flying was certified only for operation in “non-icing conditions.” Nevertheless, Grell made the decision to accept the flight. The helicopter took off from Mercy at 8:49 p.m., for its intended destination of Palo Alto County Hospital. Unfortunately, at approximately 8:57 p.m. the helicopter crashed near Clear Lake, Iowa, killing all three occupants.
Plaintiffs Jay W. Langenbau, Shelly R. Lair–Langenbau's husband, individually and as the administrator of her estate, Shelly's two minor children, through Jay Langenbau as their father and next friend, and Shelly's parents, Gerald R. Lair and Karen Lair, filed this action against defendant Med–Trans in the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County on July 22, 2013. See Doc. No. 5. Med–Trans then removed this action to this federal court on August 6, 2013, on the basis of diversity of citizenship and sufficient amount in controversy, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332
and 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). See Doc. No. 4. Med–Trans filed an answer (Doc. No. 10) on August 19, 2013.
On January 11, 2016, the plaintiffs filed their first amended complaint (Doc. No. 48). In that pleading, the plaintiffs assert the following claims: in Count I, a claim against Med–Trans for vicarious liability for Grell's negligent failure to use ordinary care in piloting the helicopter; in Count II, a negligence claim against Med–Trans for failure to use ordinary care in providing proper and safe aircraft services and failure to maintain safe and proper flight mission safety policies; and in Count III, a claim for negligent and reckless conduct of Med–Trans in causing or authorizing the operation of the helicopter in a negligent, careless, or reckless manner. The plaintiffs seek compensatory and punitive damages, costs, and such other further relief as the court deems just and proper on each of their claims. Med–Trans filed its answer (Doc. No. 51) to the first amended complaint on January 25, 2016, denying the plaintiffs' claims and asserting various affirmative defenses.
On January 15, 2016, Med–Trans filed a motion (Doc. No. 49) for partial summary judgment in which it seeks summary judgment on the plaintiffs' claim for punitive damages. On February 8, 2016, the plaintiffs filed their own motion (Doc. No. 68) for partial summary judgment as to comparative negligence of plaintiffs' deceased. In between the filing of the motions for partial summary judgment, the parties filed several evidentiary motions, which I will address in this ruling.
Med–Trans's motions now before me are the following: (1) its January 22, 2016, motion (Doc. No. 50) to exclude in part the testimony of John Ward; (2) its January 26, 2016, motion (Doc. No. 53) to exclude the testimony of Rodney Doss; (3) its January 27, 2016, motion (Doc. No. 54) to exclude in part the testimony of Arthur “Lee” Coffman; (4) its February 2, 2016, motion (Doc. No. 55) to exclude in part the testimony of Don Sommer; and (5) its February 8, 2016, motion (Doc. No. 63) to exclude in part the testimony of William Lawrence. The plaintiffs' motions now before me are the following: (1) their January 26, 2016, motion (Doc. No. 52) for jury view of subject helicopter wreckage; (2) their February 8, 2016, motion (Doc. No. 64) to strike the declaration and opinions of Brian Foster (which pertains to a declaration that Med–Trans has offered in support of its motion for partial summary judgment); and (3) their February 8, 2016, motion (Doc. No. 65) to exclude any and all opinions from defendant's expert, Michael C. Hurst, as to spatial disorientation. The parties have filed responses and replies to these evidentiary motions.
To the extent that the parties have requested hearings or oral arguments on their evidentiary motions, I find that none are necessary. Therefore, the motions in question are deemed fully submitted on the parties' written submissions.
The plaintiffs explain that the wreckage of the air ambulance helicopter is presently stored at the Wentworth Hangar at the LVN Airport in Lakeville, Minnesota. They also explain that they are seeking permission for a jury view now, months in advance of trial, so that the necessary and appropriate arrangements can be made for transportation and delivery of the wreckage. The plaintiffs represent that the helicopter wreckage will not fit within the courtroom, so it will have to be viewed by the jurors at some other location, but the plaintiffs have not suggested what that location might be. Rather, they state that, if permitted, they will make arrangements for the helicopter wreckage to be viewed under procedures and at a specific date and time—and, presumably, place—approved by the court.
The plaintiffs argue that a federal court has the inherent power to permit a jury to view places or objects outside of the courtroom. They argue that there is no better evidence of the nature and extent of the crash, the dynamics of impact, and the physical trauma suffered to the occupants than the helicopter wreckage itself and that photos and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Meridian Mfg., Inc. v. C&B Mfg., Inc.
...). Testimony is useful if it will provide information "beyond the common knowledge of the trier of fact." Langenbau v. Med-trans Corp. , 167 F.Supp.3d 983, 996 (N.D. Iowa 2016). "An expert's testimony may be excluded on ‘reliability’ grounds if it is ‘so fundamentally unsupported that it ca......
-
United States v. Sonin, Case No. 15–CR–116–JPS
... ... In re Cendant Corp., 260 F.3d 183, 192 (3d Cir.2001). Notwithstanding the automatic nature of this right of access, ... ...
-
Mahaska Bottling Co. v. Pepsico, Inc.
...and industry trends, from which the jury could draw inferences regarding a party's intent. See, e.g., Langenbau v. Med-trans Corp., 167 F. Supp. 3d 983, 1001-02 (N.D. Iowa 2016) (excluding the plaintiff's expert's testimony that the defendant corporation "showed a conscious disregard for sa......
-
Specter v. Tex. Turbine Conversions, Inc.
...Supp. 462, 471 (W.D. Pa. 1964) (three experts testified about spatial disorientation as cause of crash); Langenbau v. Med. Trans. Corp., 167 F. Supp. 3d 983, 994, 1001 (N.D. Ia. 2016) (rejecting Daubert challenge to pilot who testified about spatial disorientation based on his personal expe......
-
Views
...the property making a jury view unnecessary, the defendant’s request for a jury view is denied.” Langenbau v. Med-Trans Corporation , 167 F.Supp.3d 983 (N.D. Iowa, 2016). In a wrongful death action against the owner and operator of an air ambulance service brought by the survivors of a nurs......
-
Views
...the property making a jury view unnecessary, the defendant’s request for a jury view is denied.” Langenbau v. Med-Trans Corporation , 167 F.Supp.3d 983 (N.D. Iowa, 2016). In a wrongful death action against the owner and operator of an air ambulance service brought by the survivors of a nurs......
-
Views
...the property making a jury view unnecessary, the defendant’s request for a jury view is denied.” Langenbau v. Med-Trans Corporation , 167 F.Supp.3d 983 (N.D. Iowa, 2016). In a wrongful death action against the owner and operator of an air ambulance service brought by the survivors of a nurs......
-
Views
...the property making a jury view unnecessary, the defendant’s request for a jury view is denied.” Langenbau v. Med-Trans Corporation , 167 F.Supp.3d 983 (N.D. Iowa, 2016). In a wrongful death action against the owner and operator of an air ambulance service brought by the survivors of a nurs......