Arizona Court Awards $80,869 Sanctions in Hangar Fire Dispute
One person loaned another person money to build an aircraft hangar. The hangar later caught fire and destroyed the aircraft. The lender sued the borrower for the loan money and the value of the aircraft. The parties settled the contract dispute, with the borrower agreeing to pay a portion of the loan. The court later ruled on other claims, finding no bailment or negligence on the borrower's part. The borrower was awarded costs and expert witness fees.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Settlement
- Amount
- $160,000
- County
- Pima County, AZ
- Resolved
- 2013
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Other
- Accident Type
- Other
- Case Type
- Economic Injury, Property Loss
Settlement Context
This settlement of $160,000 is above the median of $11,429 for other cases resolved by settlement. The typical range is $4,710 to $30,000, based on 82 cases in our database.
Case Overview
In June 2006, the plaintiff loaned the defendants $200,000 for the construction of an aircraft hangar on the defendants' property in La Cholla Air Park in Tucson, Arizona. In exchange, the plaintiff would store a custom turbo prop aircraft in the hangar, and the defendants would build an apartment for the plaintiff's use during stays in Tucson. The plaintiff's aircraft was stored in the hangar beginning in November 2006.
On December 19, 2009, a fire occurred in the hangar, allegedly due to the defendants' actions or inactions, which resulted in the total destruction of the plaintiff's aircraft. The defendants received insurance proceeds but did not rebuild the hangar or repay the loan to the plaintiff. In October 2010, the plaintiff filed suit in the Arizona Superior Court for Pima County, asserting claims for breach of contract, bailment, negligence, and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The plaintiff sought a constructive trust on the insurance proceeds, an accounting, and damages.
In June 2011, the parties settled the breach of contract and constructive trust claims, with the defendants agreeing to pay $160,000 to the plaintiff. An additional $40,000 was placed in escrow, pending the defendants' claim against the plaintiff for services related to aircraft construction. Following multiple motions for summary judgment, the court ruled in September 2012.
The court granted summary judgment for the defendants on the bailment claim, finding no evidence of a bailment relationship. Summary judgment was also granted for the defendants on the negligence claim, as the court determined a fire suppression system was not required, and the plaintiff had not demanded one. The court denied the defendants' request for the $40,000 set-off and ordered the escrowed funds paid to the plaintiff. However, the court granted the defendants' motion for Rule 68 sanctions, awarding the defendants double taxable costs and reasonable expert witness fees totaling $80,869.78 against the plaintiff. A formal order was lodged in March 2013.
Understanding This Case
- This case was resolved through a settlement, avoiding the uncertainty and expense of a trial. Settlements typically resolve faster and provide guaranteed compensation.
- This case was resolved in Pima County, Texas. Local jury tendencies, judge assignments, and regional economic conditions all influence case outcomes in this jurisdiction.
- Resolved in 2013, this case reflects the legal and economic conditions of that period, including medical costs, insurance practices, and jury award trends at the time.
VerdictlyTM Score
This outcome differs from typical similar cases
This score is calculated by analyzing injury type, accident details, geographic location, temporal trends, and comparing against 2,000+ similar cases in our database.
Want to check your case value?
Get a free case evaluation to understand what your motor vehicle accident case might be worth based on cases like this in Pima County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
One driver rear-ended another vehicle stopped at a red light. The driver who was hit filed a lawsuit seeking damages for medical expenses and pain and suffering. The parties reached a settlement agreement.
One driver's pickup truck was struck from behind by another pickup truck. This happened shortly after the first pickup truck was struck by a third vehicle. The driver of the first pickup truck claimed an injury. The second pickup truck sustained significant damage.
One driver was proceeding through an intersection when their vehicle collided with another vehicle making a left turn. The injured driver claimed injuries to their back and neck. The case involved a claim against the injured driver's own insurer for underinsured motorist benefits after an initial settlement with the at-fault driver's insurer.
One driver was stopped at a stop sign when their pickup truck was struck from behind by another pickup truck. The driver and a passenger in the first truck claimed injuries. The passenger's claim was settled before trial. The driver's claim proceeded to trial, where the jury found the second driver liable for the accident.
One driver stopped their vehicle on a highway when the other driver struck them from behind at a high speed. The impact caused the driver to hit their head and briefly lose consciousness. The injured driver claimed the accident caused a brain injury, preventing them from completing college studies, and also affected their ability to care for their young son. The other driver admitted to the collision but disputed the extent and cause of the injuries.
Explore More Cases Like This
Browse similar cases by injury type and location to get a better understanding of case values in your area.