Legal Opinion

Gerhard v. Bell Helicopter Textron

District Court, D. Minnesota

Decided March 25, 1991No. Civ. 6-89-125Published

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

DEVITT, District Judge.

Introduction

This diversity action arising out of a helicopter crash is before the court upon defendant Bell Helicopter Textron’s (“Bell Helicopter”) motion for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, the court grants defendant’s motion.

Background

Plaintiff Robert Gerhard (“Gerhard”) was employed as a helicopter pilot by Claire Flying Service, an agricultural spraying business. On June 16, 1986, a helicopter piloted by Gerhard crashed and burned during a spraying operation. Ger-hard sustained serious burn injuries in the post-crash fire. Plaintiffs filed…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Abraham Loudermill and Joyce Loudermill v. The Dow Chemical Company v. M-P Construction Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1988
  3. Hudson v. Snyder Body, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  4. Morris G. WORTHY, Appellant, v. McKesson CORPORATION D/B/A Peter Hauptmann Company, AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1985
  5. Lee v. Baxter Healthcare Corp.District Court, D. Maryland · 1989

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API