This document summarizes recent developments in aviation law across various topics: - Insurance case law addressed the validity of appraisal clauses, compliance with pilot warranties, and bad faith claims. - Most federal circuit courts have adopted federal preemption of aviation safety, but approaches differ across circuits. - Federal jurisdiction issues concerned when federal question, diversity, or admiralty jurisdiction apply to aviation cases. - Personal jurisdiction cases addressed various aviation entities like manufacturers, operators, and overhaul facilities. - Other topics included the General Aviation Revitalization Act and its interpretations, expert testimony admissibility, punitive damages availability, and interpretations of the Montreal Convention.

1. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN AVIATION LAW

2. Doug Bates Don Andersen Clarke Keller Kristen Orr

3. Doug Bates

4. Recent Developments in Aviation Law

6. 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74286 (E.D. MO. July 23, 2010)

7. Appraisal clause in insurance policy found to be valid mechanism for resolving dispute regarding cost to repair physical damage to aircraft.

8. Insurer allowed to fulfill policy obligations by making repairs, even if aircraft would not be as valuable after repairs since policy excluded loss for diminution in use, appearance and/or value.

10. 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4338 (D. ME. January 17, 2011)

11. Insurance investigator forced to produce file regarding aviation accident.

13. 2011 Phila. Ct. Com. Pl. LEXIS 7 (Phila Ct. Com. Pl. January 5, 2011)

16. In re Air Crash near Clarence Center, New York, on February 12, 2009, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78464 (W.D. N.Y. 2011) (listing decisions)

24. Personal jurisdiction over French helicopter component manufacturer in Illinois in case involving Illinois accident on grounds part was designed for use in helicopter to be distributed in Illinois. Court relies on U.S. Supreme Court decision in Asahi. Russell v. SNFA, 408 Ill. App. 3d 827, 946 N.E. 2d 1076, 2011 Ill. App. LEXIS 290 (2011).

25. No personal jurisdiction in New Hampshire over component manufacturer (fuel shut off valve) for New Hampshire accident where only contact was accident in New Hampshire. West v. Bell Helicopter, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (D. N.H. 2011).

33. 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72740 (S.D. Ala. 2011)

34. “Substantial Similarity Doctrine”

35. Conditions substantially similar to the occurrence in question caused the prior accidents

36. Not too remote in time

37. Prejudice/confusion v. value of evidence

38. Service difficulty reports, warranty claims, incidents

39. Yoshio Kato, et al. v. Hawker Beechcraft Corp., et al.

40. 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136236 (N.D. Cal. 2010)

41. Plaintiffs’ motion to compel discovery of previous accidents

43. 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10429 (E.D.Ky. 2011)

44. KRS 411.184 applies to wrongful death actions

46. 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70449 (S.D. Ala. 2011)

47. Plaintiffs and Teledyne moved to strike reports and opinions of the following experts:

48. Experts for Plaintiffs: William Carden, Mark Seader, James E. Hall, Richard Wartman, Bernard J. Coogan, Robert Pierce

50. 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33065 (M.D.Fla. 2011)

51. NASCAR’s motion in limine to exclude portions of testimony of Tommy McFall re: Metallurgical engineering, Fire cause and origin, Toxicology, Aircraft maintenance, Weather radar system

52. Jean Fedelich v. American Airlines

53. 724 F. Supp. 2d 274 (D. Puerto Rico 2010)

54. Plaintiff’s expert S. Melville McCarthy

57. 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 15362 (9th Cir. 2011)

58. The Ninth Circuit clarified that a plaintiff does not have to prove that an airline violated an FAA standard to establish that there was an "accident" under Article 17 of the Montreal Convention

59. Cardoza v. Spirit Airlines, Inc.

60. 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68091 (S.D.Fla. 2011)

62. 767 F. Supp. 2d 301 (D. Puerto Rico 2011)

63. Corporate owner of two airplanes did not act as an "air transport undertaking" as defined in the Montreal Convention (Article 1(1)) when it provided gratuitous carriage to passengers

65. 760 F. Supp. 2d 832 (N.D. Cal. 2010)

66. Although jurisdiction proper pursuant to “fifth jurisdiction” under Montreal Convention, the MC did not override court’s power to dismiss for forum non conveniens

67. Khan v. Delta Airlines, Inc. et al

68. 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82293 (E.D.NY 2010)