What Kind of LAW Governs Shuttle-Related Lawsuits?

Since the definition of where outer space begins is at an altitude of >100 miles, I am puzzled as to what laws govern the (inevitable) lawsuits that will accompany the shuttle disaster.
Are we talking :
(a) International Law? (the shuttle was in outer space when it blew up)
(b) Texas Law (it broke up over Texas, and BOY-they’ve got some hotshot lawyers there, pardner!)
(c) Admiralty Law? (The Shuttle is Space-SHIP)?
Either way, let the ambulance (or in this case)hearse-cjhasing begin!
First one to file a lawsuit gets a bag of doughnuts!:smiley:

First one to file a lawsuit gets sexually abused by an elephant, hopefully.

International law, as is constantly mentioned here, isn’t very firm, and I seriously doubt there is anything relevant covering a space craft crashing in it’s own country (though there is probably a treaty or two dealing with accidents on foreign soil).

Texas law, I presume, would act the same as a government airplane crash. The shuttle was in glider-mode when it was lost.

Space SHIP? Dunno what you’re on here.

In the light of all of that, the situation isn’t terribly extraordinary. In fact, NASA advises that they are "accepting claims from individuals who may have suffered damage due to the Space Shuttle Columbia mishap. Any person desiring to file a claim should complete U.S. Government Standard Form 95, “Claim for Damage, Injury, or Death” and send it to the closest of these NASA offices. "

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/ogc/general_law/torttext.html

The process is outlined in detail here.

http://www.nasa.gov/HP_news_03041_bb_030202.html

Er, swap those two links around. :wink:

What kind of law suits do you think are going to be filed?

Suppose a Texas housewife finds part of a dead astronaut in her garden…do ya suppose “emotional distress” might be a factor!
Or how about a prized 1956 Firebird-finish marred by shuttle debris!
Or…“I can’t breath and now I got empysema from that danged rocket fuel”
I foresee a fruitful vein to be mined…

Inevitable nitpick:

A spaceship is in works of fiction. A spacecraft is in real life. Just ask your friendly neighborhood NASA rep about the difference… once the current situation calms down.

::drinks from Space Station Freedom mug::

Ralph, I think NASA answered your questions in the links I provided. :-p You file a standard tort claim.

And second/third to the ship vs. craft difference. It is like airship vs. aircraft. Airship is generally used to refer to blimps and the like, defined as “A self-propelled lighter-than-air craft with directional control surfaces.” You CAN call it a “space ship,” but you just sound like a nerd. :slight_smile:

Zagadka had it right in his link. Claims against the U.S. government must be authorized by and filed through the Federal Tort Claims Act, or FTCA. If you’re not happy with the settlement offer from NASA, you may file a claim in a U.S. District Court.

You couldn’t file suit in Texas courts, because the U.S. government doesn’t consent to being sued there, and you can only sue the U.S. with its consent. However, Texas law could still come into play; under the FTCA the liability of the U.S. is determined “in accordance of the law of the place where the [allegedly tortious] act or omission occurred”. The U.S. court has to apply the law the state court would apply in the analogous tort action, including federal law. Sound confusing? It is. This might be Texas, Florida, or any other number of states, depending on what the underlying facts of the tragedy are once we figure out exactly what happened. This is why lawyers write very, very long papers which for some reason they call “briefs”.

International law wouldn’t come into it at all in a U.S. court in any way that I can think of. Admiralty still, at present, must involve waterways.

Y’all are too kind. :wink: