News & Events

And The Defense Wins
04.05.2006

Charles H. Smith of Smith & Moore, P.L.L.C. in Dallas, successfully defeated negligence, fraud, Deceptive Trade Practices Act and breach of contract claims filed against Bell Helicopter Textron Inc. The plaintiff, Houston Helicopters, Inc., claimed that Bell improperly overhauled a main rotor grip which Houston Helicopters placed into service on a Bell 212. After the helicopter crashed, Houston Helicopters sued Bell and sought the value of the helicopter, plus attorneys' fees and costs. Houston Helicopters also sought to treble its actual damages under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act and demanded punitive damages for its tort claims. During the three-week trial in Brazoria County, Texas (made famous for the Vioxx verdict), Houston Helicopters argued that Bell improperly overhauled the grip, creating a defect that was unobservable to Houston Helicopters that ultimately destroyed the helicopter when the pitch horn-to-grip joint catastrophically failed in flight. Expert witnesses for Houston Helicopters testified that Bell had skipped steps in the overhaul process and had cross-threaded an insert into an enlarged counterbore hole. According to Houston Helicopters, the enlarged counterbore hole and the cross-threaded insert weakened the grip, making it unable to handle the normal loads applied while the helicopter was in flight. When the grip failed, the main rotor section of the helicopter separated from the rest of the hull and caused the helicopter to crash. Houston Helicopters’ experts testified that the helicopter was worth $1.4 million before the accident and that $1 million in fees and costs were incurred to try the case to verdict. Bell contended that the crash was caused by Houston Helicopters’ poor and improper maintenance. An NTSB metallurgist testified by deposition that the grip had paint build-up and fretting on the grip-to-pitch horn mating surfaces. Maintenance and metallurgical experts for Bell testified that the paint build-up and fretting showed that Houston Helicopters was improperly assembling and improperly maintaining the grip, which weakened the integrity of the grip-to-pitch horn joint. Likewise, Houston Helicopters failed to correct significant airworthiness issues before the flight, which, if properly investigated, would have revealed the problems being created by the improper maintenance. Moreover, significant indications of existing problems occurred during the accident flight, and the crew of the helicopter ignored them instead of landing the helicopter to investigate the problems. Metallurgical test results and comprehensive graphics, electronically presented through Bell’s experts, showed that it was impossible to cross-thread the insert into the grip. Further, cross-examination of Houston Helicopters’ maintenance personnel indicated that the grip showed no signs that the insert was cross-threaded or that the insert was loose in the grip when Houston Helicopters placed the grip into service. The jury unanimously found that Houston Helicopters, not Bell, caused the accident. The jury also found that all claims were barred by the statute of limitations because Houston Helicopters knew or should have known of the problems with the grip.

back to list