Summary: Initiated on August 22, 2023, this wrongful death and survivorship lawsuit is brought forth by the estates and personal representatives of five individuals who tragically lost their lives in an aircraft crash. The defendants in the case include De Havilland Aircraft of Canada, Viking Air Limited, Longview Aviation Capital Corporation, Northwest Seaplanes, Inc., and West Isle Air, Inc. The litigation centers on a fatal incident involving a De Havilland DHC-3 Otter aircraft on September 4, 2022, which led to the demise of all passengers on board. The crash is believed to have been caused by a malfunction in the aircraft's horizontal stabilizer actuator, a crucial component for flight safety. The plaintiffs argue that the actuator's design was inherently dangerous and defective, and that safer, alternative designs were available that could have averted the disaster. The defendants are charged with neglecting to ensure the airworthiness of the aircraft and its components, and for failing to inform the aircraft owner or the FAA about the defect in the horizontal stabilizer actuator design. The lawsuit holds the defendants accountable for their roles as the DHC-3 Type Certificate holders, irrespective of any historical corporate changes or changes in named ownership. The "Northwest Seaplane Defendants" are also implicated for their shared maintenance and operation of the ill-fated flight. The lawsuit encompasses several aviation companies, including Longview Distribution Services Limited, Viking Aerospace US Limited, 2219292 Alberta Limited (operating as Pacific Sky Training), and Pacific Sky Training Ltd. The plaintiffs allege that the merging of these companies into De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited led to the transfer of liabilities, including those associated with the aircraft and the transfer of Type Certificates. The plaintiffs are pursuing damages under general maritime law, Washington state wrongful death and survival statutes, and any other relevant laws for all damages resulting from the injuries and deaths of the victims. The lawsuit also aims to ascertain the extent of these companies' business operations in Washington and their dealings with Washington residents, as the contacts of wholly owned subsidiaries are considered the contacts of their parent companies for personal jurisdiction purposes.

Full Screen

Yelp Inc. v. Ken Paxton

Improved Summary: Yelp has proactively initiated legal action against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to forestall a possible lawsuit that might contest Yelp's right to categorize crisis pregnancy centers on its platform as entities that do not offer abortions or referrals to abortion providers. Yelp maintains that any such lawsuit would violate its First Amendment rights, asserting that its labels accurately represent the services these centers provide. The potential lawsuit from Paxton's office, hinted at last week, could aim to penalize Yelp for purported breaches of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Yelp's legal action seeks judicial affirmation that its labels are not misleading and a ban on Texas initiating future lawsuits regarding these labels.