Legislature(1993 - 1994)
04/08/1994 01:15 PM House JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
TAPE 94-58, SIDE A
Number 000
Chairman Porter welcomed the sponsor of HB 360, Rep. Con
Bunde.
HB 360 - AIRCRAFT/WATERCRAFT GUEST PASSENGER LAW
Number 031
REP. CON BUNDE: "This bill concerns the liability and the
presumed shared liability in travelling in Alaska on both
light aircraft or by small boat, that limits the civil
liability that an owner or an operator of an aircraft or a
watercraft would have for injuries to passengers when these
aircraft or watercraft are not paid forms of transportation.
This limited liability does not, however, cover gross
negligence or reckless or intentional misconduct. It's
simply an attempt to encourage folks to be able to take
passengers along and share their recreational opportunities
without jeopardizing their entire estate over what could be
I guess called `Act of God' accidents. Though, certainly,
as I have indicated, it does not disallow recovery for gross
negligence or intentional misconduct."
Number 064
REP. JIM NORDLUND requested a definition of compensation in
this context; would it include, say, a token payment
contributed up front for gas?
REP. BUNDE replied that such a contribution would not be
compensation, that is, would not be paying for
transportation; rather, it would be sharing in expenses.
REP. NORDLUND wondered if a definition of a token payment
might be arrived at and concluded that would be up to the
court.
REP. BUNDE responded that, while he was not a lawyer, he
would interpret it as there being no profit involved.
REP. NORDLUND: "Okay."
CHAIRMAN PORTER: "And there might not be anyway...but no
intention of a profit." Chairman Porter invited the next
person to testify.
Number 094
MIKE SCHNEIDER, Alaska Academy of Trial Lawyers, testified
via teleconference in Anchorage with regard to HB 360.
"Looking at this bill, I think you have a clear choice
between attempting to encourage people to take passengers in
their vehicles for free versus encouraging people to operate
aircraft and watercraft safely, and I would encourage the
latter, not the former. I would discourage support for this
bill.
"The rest of my comments, though, are going to assume that
this bill is going to move forward, and they are going to be
directed to how I think this bill could be improved to
address concerns of the very constituency that I assume Rep.
Bunde is interested in dealing with. I happen to operate
watercraft very occasionally, and aircraft, regularly.
Under this bill I cannot, because nobody makes a market for
this kind of coverage. There is no nonfault based coverage
out there for anything except possibly medical expenses. I
can't protect my family, and I can't protect my guest
passengers, even if I want to, under this bill, if you pass
it the way it is.
"If you amend it such that I can be liable but only up to
the extent of available insurance coverage, then I still get
the immunity that Rep. Bunde is interested in. In other
words, I don't subject my entire estate or any part of my
estate to liability, I only subject my insurance carrier to
exposure to the extent of that which I contracted for and
paid a premium for. And then I can protect my family and my
friends at least up to some minimal limit. And at the same
time by this bill the balance of my estate will be
protected. So if you pass this bill the way it is, not only
are you discouraging people from being as careful as they
possibly can when operating dangerous vehicles, but you're
absolutely eliminating the ability of aircraft and
watercraft operators to go out and protect their passengers,
whom some of us would sure like to protect.
"My other concern is, I think people should appreciate that
this bill may be a trap for the unwary."
Number 174
MR. JOHN GEORGE, lobbyist, National Association of
Independent Insurers, testified regarding HB 360. Mr.
George said he felt Mr. Schneider offered "an interesting
idea, sort of a voluntary liability system...." He said he
did not foresee objections to such a system. Mr. George
discussed the overt and more subtle pressures on boat and
plane owners from people wishing to just come along, or
catch a ride... "And," Mr. George remarked, "you're just
crazy to take someone along if you don't have specific
insurance to cover that. Because in airplanes and boats,
the potential for a serious accident is always there.
Hypothermia and hitting the ground from 5,000 feet generally
are fairly serious events. And so, you just can't take the
chance. So you either have to go out and buy insurance -
and then the question is, how much do I buy? If I buy
$100,000 and they sue me for $500,000, I'm still $400,000 in
the hole."
MR. GEORGE concluded, "I think Mr. Schneider has an
interesting and innovative idea, and I think we would have
no objection to that concept... where, if you want to buy
the coverage, you certainly can, but if you fail to, or you
only buy, say, $25,000 worth, then that's the amount that
you're exposed to. So you can protect your passengers if
you deem that appropriate. If you don't, then tell them you
don't have any and they take their own risk."
REP. NORDLUND said he had prepared an amendment after
speaking the previous day with Mr. Schneider and was
prepared to pass it out when amendments were being
entertained.
REP. BUNDE: "I think Mike presents a reasonable alternative
to all-or-nothing, and I believe the amendment would
strengthen the bill."
CHAIRMAN PORTER: "If there are no further questions, let's
hear the amendment. For the purposes of identification
let's mark this Amendment #1."
Number 237
REP. NORDLUND: "Mr. Chairman, I move Amendment #1."
CHAIRMAN PORTER: "Amendment #1 has been moved.
Discussion?"
REP. NORDLUND presented his amendment, which imposed a limit
on the liability of private individuals with regard to
accidents that might occur on their planes or boats. If the
individual chose to buy insurance to cover guests or family
members he would not be liable for civil damages exceeding
the amount of insurance he had voluntarily purchased.
CHAIRMAN PORTER: "Mike, are you still on the line? I'm a
little confused. I thought that I heard you say that there
was not insurance available."
MR. SCHNEIDER explained that if HB 360 were to be passed as
is, without Rep. Nordlund's amendment, there would be no
appropriate insurance available to these boat or plane
owners, because with the exception of medical insurance,
coverage was fault-based. "But," he said, "with the
amendment, I could still go buy my identical policy that
gives me $200,000 a seat, inadequate though it may be; I
could provide my passengers with that much protection and my
estate would be immune from anything beyond that."
CHAIRMAN PORTER: "Any further discussion on Amendment #1?
Is there objection? Seeing none, Amendment #1 is adopted.
What is the wish of the committee?"
REP. JEANNETTE JAMES: "I would move that we pass out the
Labor and Commerce committee substitute, as amended, which
will then be the Judiciary CS, with zero fiscal note and
individual recommendations."
CHAIRMAN PORTER: "We have a motion to move, as amended, the
bill with individual recommendation and zero fiscal note.
Is there discussion? Objection? The bill is moved."
REP. BUNDE thanked the committee.
There was a brief discussion on how long it would take to
prepare the CS and transmit the bill to the next committee;
Chairman Porter assured Rep. Bunde this would be
accomplished as soon as possible.
Number 345
The next bill to have been considered was HJR 60; however,
the sponsor, Rep. Vezey, was not yet present to present his
testimony. The committee continued with SB 321.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|