A passenger who survived a February 2025 Learjet crash at Scottsdale Airport has filed a lawsuit against the city of Scottsdale and multiple aviation-related parties, alleging negligence related to aircraft parking and airport operations. The crash occurred when a Learjet 35A veered off the runway during landing and struck a parked Gulfstream G200, resulting in the death of the pilot and injuries to others on board.
The complaint claims that the airport allowed the Gulfstream to be parked “in the path of the wayward” Learjet.
“A reasonable municipality prevents collisions between planes by ensuring that parked planes are kept at a reasonably safe distance from the airport’s runway and taxiways,” the suit claims.
The lawsuit also names the pilot of the Gulfstream, along with the company that towed the aircraft into position and other owning or managing entities.
A related legal filing by the Gulfstream’s insurer similarly alleges improper parking and claims the Learjet’s operators did not deploy a drag chute during landing.
Scottsdale Airport officials said at the time of the accident that the aircraft appeared to experience a left main landing gear failure before the collision.
A preliminary report by the National Transportation Safety Board found the aircraft touched down with full flaps, entered a left-wing-low attitude and departed the runway surface before crossing a taxiway and striking the parked Gulfstream. The report stated the airplane was “not equipped with thrust reversers and the drag chute was not deployed,” and documented that the left main landing gear separated during the landing sequence.
The lawsuit has no merit! This was well out side the protected Runway Safety Area which is 250Ft each side of centerline.
Treble damages for spurious suits seems fair.
My driving instructor 46 years ago did not tell me that I could be injured when my brakes fail. So I find him responsible for the damage to the fence and my left foot when my brakes failed.
Drag Chute ?????
HA! What a joke. This world is so upside down.
Next, the media will say …”It’s Trumps fault”. Its all about the $$$.
You are correct and obviously the person who put that fence up should have known your brakes would someday fail causing you injury.
Looking at the stop-action photo, the Gulfstream should have parked in the mid-field center of the runway. The Lear would have missed the Gulfstream and hit a hangar or building. Then the plaintiff could have sued the corporation or individuals who had the audacity to place a structure in that particular location. Wow…
Now you have to predict where to park a plane depending upon where a wayward plane might go after landing. In that case might as well close more than half of the airports in the country.
Someone looking for easy money. It’s ridiculous to think you can engineer around every possibility that “theoretically” happen. This is why these trial lawyers make be more than a little miffed. They only see billable hours and nothing else.
I’ll take “Frivolous Lawsuits” for $500, Alex.
It’s opportunistic, dishonest, grifting morons like this to blame for our outrageous insurance costs.
I hope this fool is countersued and jailed.
What about suing the windsock for being in the way?
Why not sue the people “possibly” responsible for the gear collapse?
Just another lawyer who hopes to get something from a settlement, where the lawyer will get most of the award. The lawyer should be assessed all court cost and twice the amount the lawyer is suing for, especially when the court determines that the Lear, never had a drag chute.
Why not blame “global warming?” Airplanes are parked near taxiways at airports all over the world. The accident airplane hit the PARKED airplane. End of story.
This lawsuit would really be a first cabin bun flexxer there there had been a Helicopter in that landing zone!
Is it April 1st already? How time flies.
Another frivolous lawsuit! The plaintiff should be sued by the city for being so stupid. If the plane had stayed in the runway, WHERE IT BELONGS, the accident never would have happened
@Jon H. Yes, a drag chute. Small Lear jets could be fitted with a drag chute. There is a big silver handle on the side of the pedestal to deploy it.
Figure, that’s what you people do down there in lower 48!
It’s not the plaintiff but his lawyer that is looking for money. If the plaintiff actually got any, it would be a grievous mistake
I am sorry, but this just makes me laugh.
This lawsuit has the equivalent merits of emotional support animals brought on board passenger airlines.
A drag chute was not standard equipment on all Gates Learjet 35A aircraft, but it was a commonly installed option on many, particularly for operators requiring enhanced stopping capabilities on short or contaminated runways.
Key Facts About the Learjet 35A Drag Chute:
Purpose: The chute provides approximately 6,000 lbs of stopping force, designed for emergency use in the event of total brake failure, hydraulic system degradation, or during high-speed, short-field landings.
Optional Equipment: Many older Learjets were built with the option for a drag chute; it was often installed in place of or in addition to thrust reversers.
Operation: The system involves a mechanical parachute release, often with a protective cover that can break upon deployment. The maximum demonstrated deployment speed is 150 knots.
Maintenance: The chute requires specialized packing after every use.
While some Learjet 35A models were equipped with the parachute, many were instead equipped with thrust reversers, or in some cases, neither, as is noted in specific incident reports
Typical ambulance chasing lawyer. Sue everyone and everything, taking up the far drained court calendar. Each party that got sued will have to hire lawyers, only to have the cases dismissed. The only thing at fault was the left landing gear, which common sense would tell you that this was a rare accident. Our legal system is broken, and there are far too many starving lawyers.
Should have used the tail hook
NOw if there is one lawyer that’s gonna be really smart, it will be the one who draws up the counter suit on behalf of the defendants. Talk about an easy payday.
This will also serve future court cases. I can see this one becoming precident for slapping back against BS suits.
This accident is the fault of Wilbur and Orville – if they had not invented the airplane in 1903, the plaintiff’s attorney would not have a case.
Trying to reply to: “John H’s” comment ‘drag chute?!’
Yep! You read that right. For anyone who hasn’t served time in a Learjet, a lot (probably most) of the 30-series had a drag chute in the tail. Looked like the ones you see installed on dragsters and funny cars (two, crossed, rectangular strips of fabric).
Only pulled it a couple times (at the behest of Maintenance) but they work! They also have a tendancy to tear up runway and taxiway lights unless you cut it loose on the runway.
IMHO if they had yanked that handle early in the sequence?… the Lear (probably?) would have snapped back to a tragectory more aligned with the runway.
Not trying to get into a fight over the case or any of that, just wanted to share a datapoint from my “years in the lears”. Stay safe all
I can usually blame my wife for most incidents maybe his wife parked there ?
He’s just trying to deflect attention away from his own incompetence.