If an airliner crashes and the NTSB cannot determine the cause, can survivors still pursue litigation?

Survivors can indeed pursue litigation even if the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) cannot determine the cause of an airliner crash. This is primarily based on the premise that circumstantial evidence can be sufficient to establish liability in personal injury cases, including aviation incidents.

Circumstantial evidence refers to the indirect evidence that implies the truth of a fact, allowing a reasonable inference to be drawn. For instance, survivors may rely on various types of circumstantial evidence such as maintenance records, previous safety violations, operational procedures, or other incidents involving the airline or aircraft type. This evidence can help build a case that suggests negligence or another form of liability, even in the absence of a definitive cause established by an investigation.

The ability to argue based on circumstantial evidence becomes especially relevant in complex cases like aviation accidents, where direct evidence of fault may be limited or even non-existent. Hence, the lack of a determined cause by the NTSB does not inhibit survivors from seeking compensation if they can convincingly present the circumstances surrounding the crash that may point to negligence or defective products.

In contrast, other options limit the potential for litigation based on assumptions about liability. Strict liability typically applies to cases involving inherently dangerous activities or defective products, and pilot negligence requires