Bain v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc.
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
257 F. Supp. 2d 872 (2002)
- Written by Serena Lipski, JD
Facts
On June 1, 2000, Scott Bain was killed in a helicopter accident in British Columbia. The helicopter was registered in and based out of British Columbia. Scott was an Australian citizen who had moved to Alberta in February 2000 to take helicopter flight-training lessons. Scott maintained a bank account in Alberta. After completing his lessons, Scott moved his residence to British Columbia, where he took a job with Bailey Helicopter, Ltd. (Bailey). Scott’s application for a commercial pilot license stated he was an Australian citizen and a resident of British Columbia. Scott’s employment records with Bailey stated his permanent residence was in Australia. Scott was still registered to vote in Australia and had not applied for Canadian permanent residency. Scott’s father, John Bain (plaintiff), averred that Scott had moved to Alberta to advance his career, liked Alberta, and had no immediate plans to return to Australia. John, along with Scott’s mother, Peta Bain (plaintiff), filed suit in a Texas federal court against Honeywell International, Inc. (Honeywell) (defendant), domiciled in Texas, alleging Scott’s accident was caused by Honeywell’s installation of a defective screw in the helicopter. The Bains alleged without evidentiary support that the screw was installed in Honeywell’s California facility. The Bains moved to apply either Texas or Alberta law, and Honeywell moved to apply British Columbia law.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Schell, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.