Negligence in Fatal Helicopter Crash Settles for $5,000,000
A flight nurse died when a helicopter crashed shortly after taking off. The helicopter company was accused of negligence. The company denied wrongdoing and disputed the injuries and damages. The parties agreed to a settlement.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
About Wrongful Death Injuries
Wrongful death claims arise when a car accident fatality is caused by another party's negligence. These cases compensate surviving family members for their losses and the decedent's pain and suffering.
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Settlement
- Amount
- $5,000,000
- County
- Dallas County, AL
- Resolved
- 2017
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Wrongful Death
- Accident Type
- Other
- Case Type
- Aviation Negligence, Aircraft negligence, Aviation negligence, Business negligence
Settlement Context
This settlement of $5,000,000 is above the median of $1,850,000 for wrongful death cases resolved by settlement. The typical range is $504,000 to $3,020,000, based on 42 cases in our database.
Case Overview
A helicopter operated by the defendant company crashed on March 26, 2016, killing a 38-year-old flight nurse and other crew members. The defendant's Eurocopter AS350-B2 departed from a regional medical center after loading a patient from a motor vehicle accident on a county road. Upon lift-off, the aircraft encountered fog, mist, and reduced visibility, climbing vertically into a cloud layer approximately 150 feet above ground level before disappearing. Authorities later located the wreckage in a swampy, heavily-wooded area. A preliminary report by the National Transportation Safety Board indicated the helicopter was not certified to fly in the inclement weather conditions present at the time.
The plaintiff, representing the deceased flight nurse, filed a negligence claim against the helicopter company, alleging its actions caused the crash and death. The defendant denied the allegations and disputed the plaintiff's claimed damages. The parties ultimately reached a pre-suit settlement of $5,000,000 to resolve the claim.
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 Dallas County, Texas. Local jury tendencies, judge assignments, and regional economic conditions all influence case outcomes in this jurisdiction.
- Resolved in 2017, 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 Dallas County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
On August 1, 2013, a pedestrian was injured in a hit-and-run accident at the intersection of Eighth Avenue and 40th Street in New York City. The pedestrian was in a crosswalk when an unknown vehicle struck her, causing severe personal injuries. The driver fled the scene without identifying themselves. On July 15, 2016, the injured party filed a claim against the Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation (MUAIC), asserting compliance with applicable state insurance law and claiming to be a covered person who had sustained a serious injury. The plaintiff sought damages for personal injuries, alleging the accident was caused solely by the negligence of the unknown driver and that all other available remedies had been exhausted. MUAIC responded with several defenses, arguing that the plaintiff's injuries were caused, in whole or in part, by her own conduct, or that she had not sustained a "serious injury" as defined under the state's insurance law. MUAIC also contended that the plaintiff might receive reimbursement from collateral sources, which would entitle the corporation to offset costs. The case proceeded to trial, and on November 18, 2019, a jury returned a verdict in favor of MUAIC, awarding no damages to the plaintiff.
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 traveling on a tollway when their vehicle ran out of gas and became disabled. The other driver, who was following behind, struck the disabled vehicle. The first driver claimed injuries to their neck and back. The jury found the second driver 80% liable and the first driver 20% liable.
One driver stopped in traffic due to construction. The other driver rear-ended the stopped vehicle. The injured driver claimed ankle and back injuries. The defense argued the accident was unavoidable or that the driver acted as an ordinary and prudent driver. The jury found the second driver liable but awarded no damages.
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.
Explore More Cases Like This
Browse similar cases by injury type and location to get a better understanding of case values in your area.