I’ve been writing about electronic discovery for almost three years now. I’ve learned that most of the time, it’s not worth trying to interest non-attorneys in the subject. My friends’, family’s, and girlfriend’s eyes glaze over pretty quickly when I started mentioning the EDRM model or document review.

So when I saw the story early this morning about big e-discovery news in the litigation following a tragic plane crash, at first I thought I had misread something.

二月 12, 2009, Colgan Air Flight 3407 crashed near Buffalo Niagara International Airport in New York, 杀害 50 人. Later that year, authorities blamed pilot error for the crash. 不出所料, families of the victims have sued the airline for failing to provide trained, capable, and rested pilots. 这一周, attorneys for the families released internal company e-mails that appear to show Colgan knew the pilot of the doomed flight was having serious problems.

What do the e-mails have to say?

The pilot, Marvin Renslow, was officially blamed for the crash. 在后期 2009, authorities said neither he nor his first officer realized the plane was slowing down too quickly, and that he also reacted improperly to warning signs that the plane was entering a stall.

Before starting work at the airline, Renslow failed a check flight, the flying equivalent to a driving test in a car. He failed two more while he worked at Colgan.

Despite that, in August 2009, Philip Trenary, president and CEO of Pinnacle Airlines, the parent company of Colgan Air, testified at a Senate hearing that they didn’t know enough to prevent Renslow from flying.

“Had we known what we know now, 没, he would not have been in that (pilot’s) 座椅,” Trenary said.

通过 Airline E-mails Could Play a Big Part in Buffalo, NY Plane Crash Lawsuit « Above the Law: A Legal Web Site – News, 评论, and Opinions on Law Firms, 律师, Law School, Law Suits, Judges and Courts.