Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States District Court for the District of Kansas
March 7, 2008, Decided; March 7, 2008, Filed
MDL No: 1721, Case No: 05-md-1721-KHV
[*1155] MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On November 8, 2002, Wade Silvey, the pilot of a Cessna Model 208B airplane died with three others on board when the plane crashed approximately three miles south of Parks, Arizona. In the District Court of Tarrant County, Texas, Mr. Silvey's family filed suit against Cessna Aircraft Company, Inc. ("Cessna"), Goodrich Corporation, FlightSafety International, Inc. ("FlightSafety") and Brown County Financial Services, L.L.C. Defendants removed the action to federal court and the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation transferred it to this Court. [**8] This matter is before the Court on Defendant FlightSafety's Motion For Summary Judgment And Brief In Support (Doc. # 212) filed April 25, 2007. For reasons stated below, the Court sustains defendant's motion in part.
] Summary judgment is appropriate if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c); accord Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 247, 106 S. Ct. 2505, 91 L. Ed. 2d 202 (1986); Vitkus v. Beatrice Co., 11 F.3d 1535, 1538-39 (10th Cir. 1993). A factual dispute is "material" only if it "might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law." Anderson, 477 U.S. at 248. A "genuine" factual dispute requires more than a mere scintilla of evidence. Id. at 252.
The moving party bears the initial burden of showing the absence of any genuine issue of material fact. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323, 106 S. Ct. 2548, 91 L. Ed. 2d 265 (1986); Hicks v. City of Watonga, 942 F.2d 737, 743 (10th Cir. 1991). Once the moving party meets its burden, the burden shifts to the nonmoving parties to demonstrate that [**9] genuine issues remain for trial as to those dispositive matters for which they carry the burden of proof. Applied Genetics Int'l, Inc. v. First Affiliated Sec., Inc., 912 F.2d 1238, 1241 (10th Cir. 1990); see also Matsushita [*1156] Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586-87, 106 S. Ct. 1348, 89 L. Ed. 2d 538 (1986); Bacchus Indus., Inc. v. Arvin Indus., Inc., 939 F.2d 887, 891 (10th Cir. 1991). The nonmoving parties may not rest on their pleadings but must set forth specific facts. Applied Genetics, 912 F.2d at 1241.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
546 F. Supp. 2d 1153 *; 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20659 **
IN RE: CESSNA 208 SERIES AIRCRAFT PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION (This Document Relates Only To Silvey, et al. v. Cessna Aircraft Company, et al., D. Kan. No. 06-CV-2261-KHV)
Subsequent History: Motion denied by In re Cessna 208 Series Aircraft Prods. Liab. Litig., 546 F. Supp. 2d 1191, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33625 (D. Kan., Apr. 23, 2008)
Prior History: Silvey v. Cessna Aircraft Co. (In re Cessna 208 Series Aircraft Prods. Liab. Litig.), 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54879 (D. Kan., July 27, 2007)
plaintiffs', pilot, summary judgment motion, preemption, flight, implied warranty, regulations, simulator, climbing, preempt, plane, feet, flight training, state law, training, summary judgment, modification, malpractice, aircraft, tangible, federal law, airplane, repair, utility pole, workmanlike, conditions, curriculum, courts, horse
Civil Procedure, Summary Judgment, Entitlement as Matter of Law, General Overview, Burdens of Proof, Movant Persuasion & Proof, Nonmovant Persuasion & Proof, Judgments, Evidentiary Considerations, Federal & State Interrelationships, Choice of Law, Significant Relationships, Constitutional Law, Supremacy Clause, Supreme Law of the Land, Federal Preemption, Administrative Law, Separation of Powers, Legislative Controls, Scope of Delegated Authority, Torts, Products Liability, Theories of Liability, Breach of Warranty