midpage
Projects
Sign in to see your projects.
697 F.3d 1092
9th Cir.
2012
Read the full case

Background

  • USAU indemnified the aircraft owner and pursued subrogation against Nabtesco for a nose landing gear actuator defect causing a runway accident.
  • Actuator 339 was manufactured April 1990 and installed on a Cessna 550 on Oct 24, 1990, with delivery to the first purchaser on Oct 30, 1990.
  • Actuator 339 was later removed, overhauled, and installed on the Cessna 560 that suffered the accident on Apr 2, 2007.
  • The accident occurred Aug 17, 2009, and Nabtesco moved for summary judgment based on GARA’s 18-year repose; USAU argued the repose runs from the accident aircraft’s delivery date.
  • The district court held the repose began with the first delivery of the actuator to its first purchaser, applying GARA § 2(a)(1)(A); USAU appealed.
  • The court construed “aircraft” in GARA as including the aircraft’s component parts, aligning the repose with the actuator’s delivery date to its first purchaser.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether GARA §2(a)(1)(A) starts the repose at the accident aircraft’s delivery or includes parts. Airplane delivery date governs; including the accident aircraft’s delivery starts the clock. Repose should be tied to the accident aircraft or to the aircraft separately, not to the parts. The statute is ambiguous but favors interpreting “aircraft” to include parts; start date is actuator delivery to its first purchaser.

Key Cases Cited

  • Blazevska v. Raytheon Aircraft Co., 522 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2008) (summary judgment deference for uncontested facts and statutory construction)
  • Lyon v. Augusta S.P.A., 252 F.3d 1078 (9th Cir. 2001) (GARA’s 18-year repose and its application to aircraft and parts)
  • Caldwell v. Enstrom Helicopter Corp., 230 F.3d 1155 (9th Cir. 2000) (GARA 18-year repose for general aviation aircraft and parts)
  • Am. Bankers Ass'n v. Gould, 412 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir. 2005) (statutory interpretation within a regulatory regime)
  • United States v. Buckland, 289 F.3d 558 (9th Cir. 2002) (statutory interpretation and legislative history guidance)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: United States Aviation Underwriters Inc. v. Nabtesco Corp.
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Date Published: Oct 2, 2012
Citations: 697 F.3d 1092; 2012 WL 4497342; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 20519; 11-35440
Docket Number: 11-35440
Court Abbreviation: 9th Cir.
Log In