Liability in a charter-plane crash often turns on maintenance logs, work orders, Airworthiness Directive compliance records, and expert analysis linking a lapse to the crash. Complete, matching records can defeat a claim, while missing entries, skipped checks, or uncorrected defects can prove it. A Part 135 charter operator is a company licensed to carry paying passengers on on-demand flights. State courts almost universally treat such an operator as a common carrier, a status described by the Sulloway & Hollis law firm as requiring the utmost care consistent with its business to carry passengers safely.
Table of Contents
- Which maintenance records decide a case?
- How is the paper trail collected?
- What have investigations found about poor upkeep?
- Why won't the NTSB conclusion alone win damages?
Which maintenance records decide a case?
The core proof is usually the aircraft logs themselves: total time, inspection sign-offs, work orders, parts replacements, and pilot discrepancy reports. Under FAA guidance, acceptable record-making and record-keeping for general aviation rests on Title 14 CFR Parts 43 and 91, covering entries, content, and retention, as explained in the FAA advisory on maintenance recordkeeping. Airworthiness Directives add a second layer.
The owner or operator must ensure compliance with all applicable directives, which Upper Limit Aviation describes as legally enforceable rules correcting unsafe conditions. Continued operation without compliance violates 14 CFR 39.7. For families, the comparison is practical:.
- matching log entries, signed work orders, and current directive tracking support the defense
- gaps, backdated entries, deferred items without approval, or a missing directive sign-off support negligence
- outside shop invoices and parts tags can fill or expose gaps in the operator log
How is the paper trail collected?
Investigators look well beyond wreckage. The National Transportation Safety Board says its Go Team and party system routinely collects flight logs, maintenance records, and personal interviews beyond the crash scene to determine probable cause, as described in the NTSB investigation process. That process creates two kinds of material for a later damages case.
Factual reports record what investigators found, measured, and collected. Analysis of probable cause explains why the Board thinks the crash happened. Plaintiffs cannot rely only on the second part. Prompt preservation letters for logs, work orders, shift records, training files, and vendor invoices matter because the paper record can change hands fast after an operator grounds aircraft or hires counsel.
What have investigations found about poor upkeep?
A Sept. 19, 2008 Learjet 60 runway overrun at Columbia, South Carolina shows how routine upkeep can become central. The National Transportation Safety Board determined the probable cause was severely underinflated tires from inadequate maintenance plus the captain's rejected takeoff after V1, according to the NTSB Learjet 60 investigation page. Aviation International News reported that the accident killed both pilots and two of four passengers.
Its account said tire pressures had not been checked for about three weeks, equating to about 36% underinflation. A second case involved oversight of contract work. The National Transportation Safety Board determined the probable cause of the Jan. 8, 2003 Air Midwest Flight 5481 Beech 1900D crash was loss of pitch control, citing the airline's lack of oversight of work at its Huntington, West Virginia maintenance station. The lesson for charter cases is direct: the operator remains exposed when it assigns work but fails to supervise, inspect, or catch rigging errors.
Why won't the NTSB conclusion alone win damages?
Federal law bars use of the Board's ultimate conclusion in a civil case. Under 49 U.S.C. Section 1154(b), no part of an NTSB report on probable cause may be admitted in a civil damages action, though factual reports may be admitted, according to a 2022 New York court decision discussed via Justia and linked in the court opinion on NTSB reports. That rule shapes strategy.
A plaintiff must prove negligence with logs, work orders, directive records, witness testimony, and expert opinion tying the lapse to the crash. A defense can use clean, consistent records and qualified expert review to show due care and break that chain. Families considering a claim should keep tickets, charter quotes, passenger manifests, photos, medical records, and any operator messages. Then ask counsel early to demand the full maintenance file, directive compliance list, shop work packages, and the factual investigation file before records are lost or archived.