## Facts

- Donald W. Weidner piloted a Piper Cherokee with three passengers: George Thomas Bowden and Adrienne and James Abrisch.
- Weidner was tired, ill, and taking medication during the flight.
- Weather along much of the route was good, but Weidner attempted instrument approaches at two airports where poor ground visibility forced missed approaches.
- Weidner diverted to Jacksonville International Airport (JIA) to attempt an instrument landing.
- An FAA controller provided Weidner a weather report suggesting conditions at JIA were acceptable for an IFR approach.
- While Weidner was still inbound, JIA’s tower received two updated weather observations in quick succession showing the weather had deteriorated severely, making landing unsafe and ground visibility nearly nonexistent.
- During renovations, the tower was operating with temporary equipment and procedures; no controller relayed either updated report to Weidner or warned him of the rapid drop in visibility.
- Relying on the earlier report, Weidner expected to break out of clouds around a 500-foot ceiling, but he encountered no visual cues.
- Weidner became confused and spatially disoriented, suspected instrument problems, descended slightly further, then attempted a missed approach.
- While disoriented, Weidner inadvertently banked into a tightening descending spiral; the aircraft crashed about a mile from Runway 7, killing all on board.
- The estates and next of kin sued the United States under the FTCA, alleging controller negligence in failing to provide (1) current, accurate weather and (2) alternate-airport options with better weather.

## Issues

1. Whether FAA air traffic controllers breached a duty of reasonable care by failing to provide Weidner timely updated weather information, and by failing to provide or suggest safer alternate-airport options, while he was conducting an IFR approach into JIA.
2. Whether the controllers’ omissions were a legal cause of the crash, even though the immediate mechanism of the accident was the pilot’s spatial disorientation.
3. Whether, under Florida comparative negligence principles applied through the FTCA, responsibility should be allocated between the United States and the pilot, reducing damages accordingly.

## Decision

- After consolidated wrongful-death actions were tried to the court in a bench trial, the court entered judgment for the plaintiffs under the FTCA.
- The court found the FAA controllers were negligent in failing to pass along materially worse, updated weather information received while the aircraft remained on approach, and in failing to provide appropriate assistance in light of the conditions.
- The court found the negligence was a proximate cause of the crash because accurate, timely information and appropriate guidance would likely have changed the pilot’s decisions before he descended into conditions likely to trigger disorientation.
- The court also found the pilot comparatively negligent (including fatigue/illness, medication use, and decision-making after earlier missed approaches) and reduced recoveries under Florida comparative fault.

## Legal Principles

- Under the Federal Tort Claims Act, the United States is liable for negligent acts or omissions of federal employees acting within the scope of employment to the same extent a private person would be liable under the relevant state’s tort law.
- Air traffic controllers owe a duty of reasonable care in providing air traffic control services, including communicating safety-significant weather changes and providing information reasonably necessary for the pilot’s decision-making during IFR operations.
- A failure to communicate updated weather or provide reasonable assistance can constitute negligence when the information is available to controllers, material to a safe approach, and the pilot is relying on ATC-provided reports.
- Proximate cause may be shown where the omission foreseeably increases the risk of harm and contributes to the chain of events leading to the accident, even if pilot error (such as spatial disorientation) is the final event before impact.
- Florida comparative negligence allows damages to be reduced in proportion to the decedent’s share of fault when both governmental negligence and pilot negligence contribute to the loss.

## Conclusion

Abrisch held the United States liable under the FTCA for FAA air traffic controllers’ failure to provide an IFR pilot timely updated weather information (and appropriate assistance given the rapidly worsening conditions), concluding those omissions were a legal cause of a fatal crash driven by spatial disorientation, while also reducing damages based on the pilot’s comparative negligence under Florida law.


Abrisch v. United States, 359 F. Supp. 2d 1214 (2004)