Chuck Yeager in the news again.

[Eric Rogers]

Saw this over on Aero-News.net.

http://aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main. ... f09417fe4f

[Fleet16b]

This whole situation surrounding him is a real shame
Not saying he is an angel as I have seen him be really cruel to people but ......
In his twilight years his legacy is just being tarnished more and more
I take it there are people (his new wife) that are controlling him
Its too bad someone can't step in and try to resue him from all this

[k5083]

Interesting that the aviation press just picked this up. It is an over-two-month-old story in the legal press.

In a companion opinion issued the same day, the appellate court affirmed the award of the Bowlins' legal fees of close to $300K.
http://www.plainsite.org/flashlight/cas ... id=1946595

August

[P51Mstg]

Too bad, Yeager filed a frivolous suit against people who were his friends that he'd known for 30 years. They let him fly their airplanes and get repaid with this..... Hope CY has $300k to cough up to pay them....

Congrats Connie and Ed....

Mark H

[JDK]

It is an over-two-month-old story in the legal press.

Can you explain it in non-legalese, August? I read it, but I didn't understand it.

[Chappie]

Some friend huh?


Chappie

[mgeorge51]

Just in case some haven't met the Bowlins, it would be hard to find a nicer and more genuine couple. Both great accomplished pilots and they have always been very generous with their time. I am positive this law suit has hurt them more then just with money.

I can not say the same thing about the general.

[P51Mstg]

Bowlins are really nice people.... Didn't deserve this as noted by Mike George...

Non legalese....

This decision was issued by the court in September, it just hit the AERO newspapers now, 2 months later....

The case (from memory).... CY sues Bowlins for a number of things, none of which he can prove. He testifies and can't remember anything (to about 200 questions). The Bowlins move to dismiss the case. Suddenly CY's lawyers file papers which contain things he "remembers" that he didn't remember in the deposition. Judge says that its basically the stuff the comes out of the back end of a bull... Judge awards Bowlins $300,000 in attorney fees, which CY must pay. The award doesn't really give the Bowlins anything (beyond the satisfaction of showing the world they were right), but reimburses them for their attorney fees (which doesn't really cover all their "costs").... They don't actually put any $$ in their pockets....

Mark H

[DH82EH]

Such a sad legacy for the General. Actions of the last decade, or so, have erased all the positives.

This is an irrecoverable spin that can only have one final outcome. An American hero remembered as a bitter, miserable, shell that will not be missed.

Andy Scott

[muddyboots]

You know, this has sort of made me take pity on the old man. I suspect there is more behind his hubris than just being a jerk. There is a lot of anger in the old guy, and it has to come from somewhere. It's shame. He could have been one of the greats, but he's et it eat him up and turn him into just another cliche.

[JDK]

Thanks Mark.

... CY sues Bowlins for a number of things, none of which he can prove. He testifies and can't remember anything (to about 200 questions). ...

So how does one read this? Poor prep for court? Hoping that you can attack with "I don't recall" answers as against the normal defending? Or that CY genuinely isn't steering this thing and doesn't actually know what's going on when on the stand on his own?

Regards,

[PeterA]

"Where am I Nancy"

[JDK]

Meurthe-et-Moselle.

[John Dupre]

Meurthe-et-Moselle.

Huh?

[k5083]

Thanks Mark.

... CY sues Bowlins for a number of things, none of which he can prove. He testifies and can't remember anything (to about 200 questions). ...

So how does one read this? Poor prep for court? Hoping that you can attack with "I don't recall" answers as against the normal defending? Or that CY genuinely isn't steering this thing and doesn't actually know what's going on when on the stand on his own?

Regards,

The forgetful witness is an obstructionist discovery tactic. We take depositions to find out what the witness knows and to try to get him to make damaging admissions. One way to hide the ball and avoid saying anything harmful is to suddenly develop amnesia about almost everything except your own name. Very common and frustrating gambit and ordinarily the questioning attorney can't do much besides rant about it. However, it carries risks if the witness has to affirmatively carry water for you later, which is obviously true when the witness is the suing party. Here the gambit seems to have been overplayed, and the court was incredulous that CY could recall nothing about difficult-to-forget events such as his involvement in court proceedings and plane crashes. (Amusingly the court grouped those two examples together as if they were similar; I imagine for CY, court proceedings might be the more traumatic of the two!) The court found such blatant and unexplained disparities between CY's amnesia at deposition versus his total recall three months later in an affidavit that it disregarded the affidavit as a sham. Of course it it was really more of a sham deposition that the court was punishing CY for.

The sham testimony issue is a bit of a side issue though. The actual grounds for tossing all of CY's claims are that he waited too long, suing in 2008 over web content the Bowlins published in 2003. The case really hinged on an issue, of interest mostly to lawyers, about whether an entire website is deemed republished whenever an update to any part of it is made, or whether you are only liable for a statement on your website when you first post that statement.

The underlying merits of CY's false advertising and right of publicity claims were not decided, so this case does not provide guidance for anyone else out there who may be making commercial use of a pilot's name, likeness, airplane markings, or whatever.

August