Facts

The case stemmed from a 2014 crash of a Sikorsky MH-60 Special Operations Helicopter flown by the United States Army's 160th SOAR Division. The crash occurred on Hunter Army Airfield, in Georgia, following a routine training mission. The air traffic control tower observed the aircraft spinning out as it came in for landing. The tower's repeated attempts to contact the aircraft went unanswered. A few minutes after the crash, Plaintiff Jon Ternstrom extricated himself from the wreckage and called 911 from his cell phone. Around the same, the tower declared an emergency. Emergency responders arrived to the crash site approximately 10 minutes after the crash. The Army determined the crash was caused by a tail rotor malfunction that caused the aircraft to spin out of control.

The crash spawned litigation against numerous parties that were ultimately separated, and litigated in different venues around the country. By the time of trial, only Plaintiffs Jon and Maria Ternstrom and Defendant Cubic Defense Applications, Inc., remained in the case. Defendant had manufactured and sold a special operations tactical transponder and emergency locator transmitter (ELT) for the 160th, which the Army installed on the aircraft. Upon impact, the air traffic control tower did not receive a distress signal from the ELT.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs alleged that the tower did not receive a distress signal due the ELT being defectively designed and manufactured, resulting in a delay of first responders' arrival to the scene of the crash.

As a result of the alleged delay, Plaintiff Jon Ternstrom contended he was limited to flying as a maintenance pilot, and could no longer fly as a mission pilot, because he was afraid to fly without his cell phone. He feared that, if a crash occurred, nobody would be able to find the crash without a survivor calling 911.

Plaintiff Maria Ternstrom alleged loss of consortium damages caused by her husband's alleged emotional injuries due to his inability to fly missions.

Plaintiffs further claimed that, because Mr. Ternstrom was unable to fly missions, he would not be promoted and would be forced to retire from the Army.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant Cubic Defense Applications, Inc., contended the ELT functioned as designed and the reason the tower did not receive a distress signal, as confirmed by the Army's investigation, was due to an improperly prepared coaxial cable connecting the ELT to the antenna. The coax cable was not provided or manufactured by Defendant, and neither was the antenna. The Army installed the ELT, the coax cable and the antenna on its aircraft.

Defendant also provided evidence that the Army performed functionality checks on every single ELT sold by Defendant, prior to the Army accepting delivery of them approximately six years before the subject crash occurred.

Defendant further contended that Plaintiffs' loss of earnings and loss of consortium damages were identical to the damages Plaintiffs attributed to the crash itself and the other parties Plaintiffs had sued in various other venues.

Defendant highlighted the fact that, aside from Plaintiffs themselves, the only witnesses in Plaintiffs' case were paid experts. There was no medical evidence of Mr. Ternstrom's alleged psychological fear, no evidence that his fear was caused from the delay of first responders, no evidence that there was in fact a delay as opposed to normal response time, and no evidence to refute the Army's post-crash conclusion that the ELT was functioning. There was also no evidence or testimony from the Army itself as to Mr. Ternstrom's performance as an Army pilot or his promotability. Moreover, Defendant pointed out that following his recovery from his crash-related injuries, Mr. Ternstrom returned to flying status and was still being deployed. He was also promoted in 2016.

Specials in Evidence

Future Loe: $3.2 million

Damages

Plaintiff Jon Ternstrom sought damages for emotional distress and loss of future earnings. Plaintiff Maria Ternstrom sought damages for loss of consortium.

Injuries

Plaintiff Jon Ternstrom conceded that his physical injuries were caused from the crash itself but claimed his injuries were exacerbated by the alleged delay in arrival of first responders. However, no medical provider had told him his injuries were in fact exacerbated. Plaintiff Jon Ternstrom claimed he suffered from a fear of flying without his cell phone caused by the lack of ELT signal and allegedly resulting delay of first responders' arrival to the crash site. His fear of flying without his cell phone allegedly kept him from flying missions, so he only flew as a maintenance pilot. As a result, he claimed he would not be promoted in rank and would have to retire soon.

Result

Defense verdict.

Deliberation

less than an hour

Length

six days