Widow Wins $10.5M Due to Slow Crash Response

A Washington state widow won a $10.5 million verdict against the organizers of an aviation event in which her husband crashed and burned to death in an experimental aircraft.

She claimed that the organizers failed to provide a properly trained fire crew and equipment, and that their response to the crash was shockingly slow.

When Don Corbitt's plane crashed on takeoff at a regional aviation show, he spent five minutes trapped in the cockpit as bystanders frantically attempted to free him and keep the flames at bay.

They expended eight fire extinguishers before the fire crew arrived. But by then it was too late.

Plaintiff's attorney Frank Smith argued that if the organizers had provided standard airport firefighting equipment and responded promptly to the crash, Corbitt would not have died.

"In this case, they were putting on a fly-in. They knew that guys were flying in with limited experience. Accidents were inevitable at their event," Smith said.

The defense did not return messages left seeking comment.

On the runway in peril

Corbitt, a married father of five children under the age of 10, cashed in his stock options and retired from Microsoft at age 38.

As a hobby, he took up aviation and became enthralled with experimental aircraft. He obtained his pilot's license and racked up 170 hours of flight by the time the Northwest Experimental Aircraft Association (NWEAA) held its annual invitation-only fly-in at a small airport in Arlington, Wash., about 30 miles north of Seattle.

The five-day event attracted nearly 1,400 aircraft and 60,000 spectators.

Smith clarified that "experimental aircraft" doesn't refer to bizarre designs, but to aircraft pilots order in kits and construct themselves. The RV-6A that Corbitt built is a two-seat enclosed airplane that looks similar a conventional private aircraft.

Corbitt flew in the morning of July 7, 1999, and landed without incident at the airport, which has no fire department and thus relies on the city's volunteer firefighters. The tiny airport doesn't even have a control tower, so the FAA has to set up a temporary one during the fly-in.

The problems arose when Corbitt tried to fly back to Seattle.

"It was a confusing situation," said Smith. "He was vectored around, he got onto the runway, they made him back-taxi one-third of the runway, he turned around and started to take off. "

The aircraft stalled on take off and never got higher than 50 feet. It crashed on a runway in front of some hangars and quickly caught fire.

"And that began our case," Smith said. "Our case did not begin with his crash. The case began when he was on the runway in peril. "

Corbitt was alive and pinned in the cockpit. Bystanders ran across the airport and several tried to get him out as the flames grew. Corbitt was conscious and talking to his would-be rescuers.

"Several people went back to the hangars and got fire extinguishers, and guys were trying to keep the flames away from him, talking to him, wondering where the fire department was," Smith said.

Three witnesses had time to run to the crash site, run back to a hangar to retrieve fire extinguishers, and run back and attempt to put out the flames. In all, they expended eight fire extinguishers before the fire crew arrived, which evidence showed to be about five minutes after the crash.

When the volunteer firefighters finally arrived, they weren't prepared, according to Smith. They did not have the type of fire truck used to fight airport fires, they weren't wearing any protective gear and they grabbed the wrong hose, which caused further delay.

Finally, the firefighters used water, instead of foam, to extinguish the flames.

"That was inappropriate as well," he said.

By the time the firefighters turned the hoses on Corbitt, he was in the cockpit, engulfed in flames and burning to death.

'Something, anything, objective'

The plaintiffs argued that if the organizers had the proper equipment and trained firefighters, Corbitt would be alive today.

During discovery, Smith learned that the organizer's parent organization, the 170,000-member Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA), had a contractual requirement to negotiate fire control with the town fire department.

"They never did it," said Smith. "There was no contract and frankly, no real understanding that [there would be] any airport fire service beyond the fact that the city had volunteer firemen sitting around in their tennis shoes. "

The city successfully argued that it should be dropped from the suit based on the public duty doctrine, so the case went to trial against the two experimental aircraft associations.

Smith called the town fire chief as an expert witness and he testified that the fire should have been extinguished in 90 seconds to two minutes. Eye witnesses testified that if this had happened, Corbitt would have lived, since they were still talking to him two minutes after the fire started.

Smith backed up the perceptions of the witnesses with a emergency response report that said the response was requested at 3:01 p.m. and the fire was out at 3:08 p.m. "To the extent you can find something, anything, objective to corroborate witness testimony, [that] is invaluable," he said.

Smith also uncovered EAA documents that required the regional group arrange for full-time fire protection with a turret fire truck and trained airport rescue firefighters.

All the firefighters also testified at the trial. They claimed they arrived at the fire much sooner than five minutes after it started.

"But the jury didn't believe them," Smith said. "Even the firemen testified that at the time they were finally able to turn the hoses on [Corbitt], he was standing, burning in the flames. "

According to Smith, the defense claimed Corbitt was responsible for his own death, putting on a flight expert who said Corbitt stalled the aircraft and caused the crash.

But Smith countered that it was the slow response, not the crash itself, that caused Corbitt's death.

Burned alive

As for damages, Corbitt left behind five children and a widow. He was not working at the time of his death, but in the six months prior he had made $100,000 working occasionally as a software consultant.

Smith told jurors that had Corbitt worked an entire year, he would have made $200,000, and an expert economist testified Corbitt's death resulted in a $5.2 million economic loss to the family. The defense argued the loss was only $1.4 million. Ultimately, jurors returned a verdict of $3 million for economic loss.

Washington law allows a claim for the fear of impending doom and horror that a victim suffers prior to death.

"My argument to the jury was, 'I have no idea what it's like to burn alive, but it's gotta be the most horrible thing in the world,'" Smith said. "We toyed with the idea of having an expert talk about the physiology of burning alive, but we decided not to. " He decided that human imagination was perfectly capable of imagining the horror.

Smith suggested to jurors that $1 million per minute was a reasonable award for a man who was burning to death. He estimated that Corbitt burned for four minutes. Ultimately jurors awarded $3 million.

Smith put three of the children on the stand for less than five minutes each to introduce them to the jury.

"At least in Washington, the law is that they are our clients. They have claims for the loss of their dad," Smith said, and thus they had a right to address the jury.

Corbitt's widow received $1.5 million for loss of consortium and each child received $600,000. The total verdict was $10.5 million

Although the city got out of the case, the jury apportioned 15 percent fault to it. Jurors also found Corbitt was 15 percent negligent, but the negligence was not a proximate cause of his death.

"The reason is, he was alive and well and sitting in the cockpit after the crash," Smith said. "All he suffered was a broken leg" before the flames from the fire killed him.

Plaintiff's attorney: Frank Smith and Robert Hedrick of Hedrick & Smith in Seattle.

Defense attorney: Jeffrey Laveson of Carney Badley Spellman in Seattle.

The case: Corbitt v. City of Arlington; Dec. 22, 2002; Superior Court, Snohomish County, Wash.; Judge David A. Kurtz.

News stories provided by third parties are not edited by "Site Publication" staff. For suggestions and comments, please click the Contact link at the bottom of this page.