From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brewer v. Parker Hannifin Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 30, 2008
298 F. App'x 582 (9th Cir. 2008)

Opinion

No. 07-35326.

Argued and Submitted October 22, 2008.

Filed October 30, 2008.

John A. Follis, Esquire, Anderson Hunter Law Firm, Everett, WA, Louis Franecke, Esquire, Franecke Law Group, San Rafael, CA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Dana Baiocco, John D. Goetz, Esquire, Jones Day, Pittsburgh, PA, Bradley S. Keller, Byrnes Keller, LLP, Seattle, WA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, Thomas S. Zilly, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-04-02189-TSZ.

Before: SILVERMAN, McKEOWN, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Plaintiffs, personal representatives of the estates of Philip and Sondra Brewer, appeal the district court's grant of summary judgment to Parker Hannifin on their products liability claim. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Brewer has not challenged the district court's ruling, based on Ohio law, that the vacuum pump on the Brewer aircraft had substantially changed from the pump that left Parker's facility in 1984, due to the Aero overhaul process. The Parker manuals and mailings that Brewer relies on here applied to Parker products, not cannibalized subparts of Aero-overhauled products. Thus, even if manuals and mailings can generally be considered a "part" for the purposes of the General Aviation Revitalization Act ("GARA"), see Caldwell v. Enstrom Helicopter Corp., 230 F.3d 1155, 1157 (9th Cir. 2000), the manuals and mailings upon which Brewer relies cannot satisfy GARA's other requirement, that they be "an integral part of the general aviation aircraft product" that is "alleged to have caused the death, injury, or damage." Id. at 1157-58; 49 U.S.C. § 40101 note, § 2(a)(2). Put simply, even if the manuals and mailings are "parts" capable of restarting GARA when they replace other manuals pertinent to a particular pump, given the district court's Ohio law ruling, they are not "parts" of the vacuum pump that actually caused the Brewer aircraft accident, or of the aircraft containing that pump. The manuals and mailings therefore fail to trigger GARA's rolling statute of repose. As a result, the district court correctly granted summary judgment as to Brewer's claim against Parker.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Brewer v. Parker Hannifin Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 30, 2008
298 F. App'x 582 (9th Cir. 2008)
Case details for

Brewer v. Parker Hannifin Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Matthew J. BREWER, Personal Representative of the Heirs and the Estate of…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Oct 30, 2008

Citations

298 F. App'x 582 (9th Cir. 2008)

Citing Cases

McAuliffe v. Robinson Helicopter Co.

Courts in the Ninth Circuit regularly enforce GARA's statute of repose to bar suits against aircraft…