Ninth Circuit revives lawsuit over deadly Hawaii helicopter crash

The appeals panel said a Hawaii judge misapplied a federal aviation liability law over replacement parts on helicopters.

By Jeremy Yurow, Court House News, April 21, 2026

HONOLULU (CN) — A Ninth Circuit panel said a federal judge misinterpreted a key aviation liability law when tossing claims against an aircraft manufacturer named in a wrongful death lawsuit over a fatal Hawaii helicopter crash.

In a decision issued Tuesday, the three-judge panel said the lower court wrongly required plaintiffs to show replacement helicopter parts were meaningfully altered before restarting the 18-year liability window under the General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994, or GARA.

GARA generally bars lawsuits against aircraft manufacturers more than 18 years after a plane is delivered. But the law includes a rolling provision that can restart that clock when a new component replaces an older one and is purported to have caused the crash.

U.S. Circuit Judge M. Margaret McKeown said a lower court wrongfully concluded that replacement parts of a sightseeing helicopter that crashed in 2019 did not restart the liability period because they were not substantively different from the originals.

“On its own terms, then, GARA does not require a showing of any degree of alteration, and the district court’s reading of a ‘substantive alteration’ requirement into the statute was legal error,” McKeown, a Bill Clinton appointee, wrote.

The helicopter’s main rotor hub and blades, identified by plaintiffs — parents of a woman who died while aboard a Robinson Helicopter Co. aircraft that broke apart midair during a tour flight — as the likely cause of the crash, were replaced in 2018, just months before the accident but more than 18 years after the helicopter was originally manufactured.

“‘Replaced’ means exactly what it says — replaced,” McKeown said.

The plaintiffs argue the helicopter’s rotor system, both before and after the replacement, was defectively designed, creating a dangerous condition known as mast bumping, which can lead to an in-flight breakup.

U.S. Circuit Judge Jennifer Sung, a Joe Biden appointee, joined McKeown in the opinion, but U.S. Circuit Judge Michelle Friedland partially dissented.

The Barack Obama appointee wrote that Ninth Circuit precedent requires a material change to a replacement part before the liability period can restart and would have affirmed the dismissal in full.

“Caldwell indicates that the McAuliffes were required to show that those components were materially altered in some way, whether through a new design or a manufacturing defect. It is not sufficient to say that those parts were replaced,” Friedland wrote, referencing a case where the Ninth Circuit a helicopter operation manual was “substantively altered” before a crash.

Representatives for Robinson Helicopter Co. and attorneys for the McAuliffe’s did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

While Friedland disagreed over the majority’s interpretation of Ninth Circuit precedent, she sided with the rest of the panel’s decision that the plaintiffs failed to show they could bypass GARA under its fraud exception, which applies when a manufacturer knowingly misrepresents or withholds material safety information from federal regulators.

The panel said the plaintiffs offered only generalized claims and didn’t provide specific evidence that Robinson misled the Federal Aviation Administration or concealed relevant information.

The panel also upheld the lower court’s decision denying the plaintiffs permission to amend their complaint, finding they had not acted diligently despite knowing early in the case they would need to overcome GARA’s liability limits.