CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. 02-08-00210-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 31, 2011

Lourdes Maria Vargas De Damian, Individually, as Next Friend to Nicole Denisse Damian Vargas, and as Representative of the Estate of Demetrio Damian Chen v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.

Appellants, including family members of deceased pilots and passengers, filed a lawsuit against Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. following a Bell 407 helicopter crash on January 27, 2000, in Panama. The lawsuit alleged strict products liability and negligence, specifically citing design defects in the helicopter's windshield and restraint system. The crash was caused by a black vulture penetrating the windshield, which incapacitated Captain Damian and resulted in fatalities. A jury found a design defect, negligence by both Bell and Captain Damian (50% responsibility each), and awarded damages. The trial court's final judgment was issued on February 28, 2008. On appeal, the court affirmed the portion of the trial court's judgment related to the claims on behalf of Gloria Gasperi's estate. However, it reversed and rendered judgment that other appellants take nothing. The appellate court found no federal preemption, ruled that the Panamanian statute of limitations did not bar the claims, and upheld the sufficiency of evidence for the seatbelt design defect and Captain Damian's comparative negligence. Conversely, the court found insufficient evidence for design defects related to the windshield and door mounts. Claims of juror misconduct were rejected due to legal prohibitions on juror testimony.

Helicopter crashProducts liabilityDesign defectNegligenceFederal preemptionComparative negligenceWrongful death claimsSurvival claimsStatute of limitationsJury misconduct
References
103
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Damian v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.

This case involves an appeal stemming from a helicopter crash on January 27, 2000, where Appellants sued Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. for strict products liability and negligence due to design defects in the Bell 407 helicopter. The jury found a design defect, negligence by Bell and Captain Damian, and awarded damages. Key issues on appeal included federal preemption of design defect claims, the Panamanian statute of limitations, standing for equitably-adopted children, and the capacity for survival claims. The court affirmed the judgment regarding Gloria Gasperi's estate claims but reversed and rendered a take-nothing judgment for other appellants due to insufficient evidence of safer alternative designs for the helicopter's windshield and door mounts. The court also upheld the jury's finding of comparative negligence against Captain Damian.

Products LiabilityNegligenceHelicopter CrashBird StrikeDesign DefectFederal PreemptionStatute of LimitationsWrongful DeathSurvival ClaimExpert Testimony
References
87
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Barger v. Petroleum Helicopters, Inc.

A helicopter piloted by Walter Barger crashed into the Gulf of Mexico, killing all on board. His family, led by Mary Elizabeth Barger, sued his employer, Petroleum Helicopters, Inc. (PHI), and the helicopter manufacturer, Bell Helicopters/Textron (Bell), alleging negligence, unseaworthiness, and product defect. The court found PHI negligent for inadequate maintenance and inspection, and Bell liable for defective design. The ruling affirmed that the helicopter was a "vessel" and Barger a "seaman" under maritime law, denying PHI's attempt to limit its liability. Damages were awarded for lost earnings, household services, and loss of parental guidance for Barger's children, with PHI bearing 80% and Bell 20% of the comparative fault.

Aviation AccidentHelicopter CrashMaritime LawJones ActDeath on the High Seas Act (DOHSA)NegligenceProduct LiabilityDefective DesignUnseaworthinessLimitation of Liability Act
References
92
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Williamson v. Petroleum Helicopters, Inc.

Plaintiffs Kay Williamson, John Richards, and Carol Richards filed a wrongful death suit under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) following a helicopter crash in the Gulf of Mexico that killed James Edward Williamson and John Paul Richards. The crash occurred during transport between offshore platforms. Defendants Petroleum Helicopters, Inc., Eurocopter S.A., and American Eurocopter Corporation moved for partial summary judgment, arguing that the Death on the High Seas Act (DOHSA) should apply, thereby precluding punitive and non-pecuniary damages. The Court found that admiralty jurisdiction existed, leading to the application of maritime law, specifically DOHSA, over OCSLA. Consequently, DOHSA's limitations on damages resulted in the granting of the defendants' motion and the dismissal of the plaintiffs' claims for punitive and non-pecuniary damages.

Wrongful DeathOuter Continental Shelf Lands ActDeath on the High Seas ActAdmiralty JurisdictionMaritime LawSummary JudgmentPunitive DamagesNon-Pecuniary DamagesHelicopter CrashOffshore Platform Accident
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Baird v. Bell Helicopter Textron

This memorandum opinion addresses several motions arising from a helicopter crash in Surinam on May 25, 1976, which severely injured Canadian citizen F. C. Baird. Baird sued Bell Helicopter Textron, a Texas manufacturer, for strict products liability. Bell then brought third-party claims for contribution against three Canadian corporations: Lac St. Jean Aviation, Ltd., Canadian Helicopters, Ltd., and Okanagan Helicopters, Ltd., alleging negligent maintenance. The court denied motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction by Lac St. Jean and Canadian Helicopters, finding sufficient contacts with Texas. Okanagan's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim was also denied due to a factual dispute. The court further ruled that Texas law applies to the products liability claim, pecuniary losses, and Bell's contribution claims, while Canadian law governs F. C. Baird's non-pecuniary damage claims and requires further briefing regarding D. L. Baird's loss of consortium claim.

Products LiabilityChoice of LawPersonal InjuryHelicopter CrashStrict LiabilityNegligenceContributionIndemnityJurisdictionLong-Arm Statute
References
69
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Aerospatiale Helicopter Corp. v. Universal Health Services, Inc.

Aerospatiale, the helicopter manufacturer and lessor, appealed a trial court judgment that denied its claims against Universal Health Services of Nevada, the lessee, following a fatal helicopter crash. Aerospatiale sought contractual indemnity for wrongful death settlements and damages for Universal's alleged breach of an insurance agreement. The appellate court reversed the trial court's findings on proximate causation regarding the helicopter's cowling separation and an inoperative torquemeter, concluding these were not causes of the accident. It also determined the indemnity agreement was valid under Texas law and applicable to the incident. Furthermore, the court reversed and remanded on the insurance claim, finding Universal had not satisfied its obligation for full coverage and Aerospatiale had not waived its right to the $25,000 deductible.

Breach of ContractContractual IndemnityInsurance DisputeHelicopter AccidentPilot NegligenceProximate CausationAppellate ProcedureChoice of LawTexas Business and Commerce CodeTexas Workers' Compensation Act
References
21
Case No. 02-16-00489-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 14, 2018

Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. v. Brian Burnett

Brian Burnett sued his former employer, Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., alleging age discrimination after his termination at age 40. The trial court found in favor of Burnett, awarding him damages for lost wages and mental anguish. Bell Helicopter appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence for liability and damages, and arguing that statutory caps should apply to the awards. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that there was legally and factually sufficient evidence to support the age discrimination findings and that the Texas Labor Code caps did not apply to front pay or future mental anguish damages.

Age DiscriminationWrongful TerminationEmployment LawFront PayMental AnguishTexas Labor CodeAppellate ReviewSufficiency of EvidenceDamagesPretext
References
65
Case No. 2-04-142-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 03, 2005

IAC, Ltd., Bonded Structures, Ltd., Van Horn Aviation, L.L.C., and Parts Manufacturing Associates, L.L.C. v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.

This case concerns an interlocutory appeal by IAC, Ltd., et al. against a temporary injunction granted to Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. The injunction prevented appellants from using Bell's trade secrets related to 206B and OH-58 helicopter blades. Appellants challenged the injunction's validity, specificity, a witness exclusion, and the bond amount. The Court of Appeals found that Bell demonstrated a probable right to recovery on its trade secret misappropriation claim and that an irreparable injury would occur without the injunction. The court also determined the injunction was sufficiently specific, the exclusion of witness testimony was not an abuse of discretion, and the bond amount was within the trial court's discretion. Therefore, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's order granting the temporary injunction.

Trade SecretsTemporary InjunctionInterlocutory AppealMisappropriationHelicopter ManufacturingAppellate ReviewAbuse of DiscretionIrreparable HarmTexas Court of AppealsIntellectual Property
References
36
Case No. 05-17-00979-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 23, 2019

Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. v. Shirley Dickson, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Billy Dickson, Randall C. Dickson, Daryl W. Dickson, Deana K. Boaz Kizer

Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. appealed a trial court's judgment awarding damages and post-judgment interest to Shirley Dickson and other appellees on claims arising from Billy Dickson's death from mesothelioma. The appellees alleged gross negligence by Bell Helicopter due to Billy's asbestos exposure while supervising construction of testing enclosures. The appellate court found the evidence legally insufficient to support the jury's findings on the causation elements of gross negligence. Specifically, there was no evidence Bell was aware of the extreme risk posed by the asbestos-containing boards or that Billy could develop mesothelioma during the relevant 1962-1968 period. Therefore, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and rendered judgment that the appellees take nothing on their claims.

MesotheliomaAsbestos ExposureGross NegligenceCausation StandardBystander ExposureOccupational HealthExemplary Damages CapWorkers' Compensation ExclusivityLegal Sufficiency ReviewProspective Risk Assessment
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

American Eurocopter Corp. v. CJ Systems Aviation Group

This case involves a helicopter crash caused by a defective main rotor gearbox. American Eurocopter Corporation (American), which overhauled and supplied the gearbox, appealed the trial court's judgment regarding its claims against CJ Systems Aviation Group (CJ), the helicopter operator. The helicopter, owned by Duke University Medical Center, crashed after its pilot, John Holland, and a mechanic, Charles Edgerton, decided to perform a "ferry flight" despite an oil-pressure warning light, believing it to be a faulty switch. The trial court found American's negligence was a proximate cause of the accident, denied American's contractual indemnity claim against CJ based on the express negligence doctrine, and awarded CJ damages on its breach of warranty counterclaim for the cost of the defective gearbox. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding there was legally and factually sufficient evidence of American's negligence as a proximate cause and that the express negligence doctrine correctly barred American's indemnity claim. The court also upheld CJ's breach of warranty award, noting American failed to preserve its argument regarding the warranty's limitation of remedy.

Helicopter crashMain rotor gearboxProduct liabilityNegligenceProximate causeIndemnity agreementBreach of warrantyExpress negligence doctrineSuperseding causeFerry flight
References
34
Showing 1-10 of 108 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational