Quiles v. Sikorsky Aircraft
A military officer injured in helicopter accident brought this action against Sikorsky Aircraft, a division of United Technologies Corporation, and against United Technologies Corporation, asserting claims stemming from a helicopter accident which occurred on April 17, 1995.
On that day, an HH–60J Coast Guard helicopter experienced a hard landing as a result of a crack in a part called a tip cap.
The accident caused back injuries and related problems to the plaintiff, at the time a flight mechanic for the United States Coast Guard.
Quiles has brought claims against the defendant companies, which designed and built the helicopter, for design and manufacturing defects on negligence and strict liability theories, as well as for breach of warranties, failure to warn, and failure to recall.
Defendants have moved for summary judgment on all counts based on the government contractor defense, which shields contractors from liability in cases in which they followed government specifications.
Plaintiff contends primarily that the defendants did not follow the government's specifications in building the allegedly defective helicopter and moves to strike the defendants' affidavits.
Defendants moved for summary judgment based on government contractor defense. The District Court, held that: (1) manufacturer's executive's statement regarding government's role in approving helicopter design was admissible; (2) testimony as to oral statements by government personnel concerning cause of rotor part failure was inadmissible; (3) rotor part conformed to government specifications; (4) possibility that manufacturer could have made helicopter safer did not preclude assertion of government contractor defense; and (5) officer had no cause of action for failure to warn. Motion granted.
