Kreindler Defeats Motion to Dismiss in Robinson, Lycoming Helicopter Case
- Kreindler & Kreindler defeated a motion to dismiss brought by Robinson Helicopter Company, Lycoming, and Premier Aviation based on the forum non conveniens doctrine in California action.
- The case involved the crash of a Robinson R44 Raven II helicopter in Fairmont Hot Springs, British Columbia following a failure of its Lycoming engine.
- Kreindler attorneys argued that California, where the helicopter was designed, manufactured, assembled, and tested, was the most appropriate forum for the lawsuit.
On Friday, May 26, 2006, the Honorable Ernest Hiroshige of the Los Angeles County Superior Court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the action based on the forum non conveniens doctrine. The case involves the crash of a Robinson R44 Raven II helicopter in Fairmont Hot Springs, British Columbia, on December 28, 2004, following an engine failure in which the sole occupant, the pilot, was killed.
Robinson Helicopter Company, Lycoming and Premier Aviation were unsuccessful in their attempt to have the case dismissed from the California court on forum non conveniens grounds. Kreindler partners argued that California, where the helicopter was designed, manufactured, assembled and tested, was the most appropriate forum for the litigation and that neither Colorado nor Canada were appropriate alternative venues for the litigation to proceed.
Kreindler has represented victims of helicopter crashes in courts throughout the United States and has previously represented a number of plaintiffs against Robinson and Lycoming.
Kreindler partners Justin Green and Stuart Fraenkel presented the May 26 argument for the widow and son of Burt Goodman, Ph.D. of Colorado, the deceased pilot of the failed helicopter.