Aircraft Collision Injury Claims in Missouri: What You Must Prove?

If you were injured in a collision involving an aircraft, whether it happened in the air, during landing, or on the ground while taxiing, you may have a negligence claim against the pilot, operator, or another responsible party. These cases are filed as ordinary negligence claims in state court, but aviation is one of the most heavily regulated activities in the country. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations and standard aviation safety practices often shape what a pilot or operator was required to do, and courts frequently look to those federal standards when deciding whether someone acted reasonably. Understanding this interplay early matters, and an experienced Missouri plane crash lawyer can help sort out how it applies to your situation.

What Is an Aircraft Collision Injury Claim Under Missouri Law?

An aircraft collision injury claim is, at its core, a negligence claim: it asks whether a pilot or aircraft operator failed to exercise reasonable care and, as a result, caused a collision that injured someone. That basic framework is the same one Missouri courts apply to car accidents, premises cases, and other negligence claims. What makes aviation cases different is the source of the “reasonable care” standard. Because aviation is federally regulated, FAA rules governing things like right-of-way, radio communication, traffic pattern procedures, minimum separation distances, and taxiing conduct often inform what a reasonably careful pilot or operator would have done under the circumstances. A pilot’s compliance, or non-compliance, with those federal standards, along with generally accepted aviation safety practices, can be important evidence of whether the pilot met the ordinary duty of care.

It is worth being upfront about a nuance here. Even though a lawsuit for injuries from an aircraft collision is typically filed in Missouri state court as a negligence action, federal aviation safety regulations frequently play a significant role in establishing the standard of care and in showing what went wrong. This is not unusual, since state negligence claims often incorporate outside safety standards, but aviation cases tend to rely on federal rules more heavily and more consistently than many other types of injury claims. Given this overlap between state-law claims and federal aviation standards, and the fact that aviation accidents are often investigated by federal authorities, anyone considering a claim should talk to an attorney early so the case can be built with this framework in mind from the start.

What You Must Prove in Aircraft Collision Injury Claim?

An aircraft collision injury claim generally requires proof of the standard negligence elements:

Duty. The pilot or aircraft operator owed a duty to exercise reasonable care in operating the aircraft, which typically includes following applicable aviation safety rules, regulations, and standard procedures relevant to the phase of flight involved (en route, landing, or ground operations).

Breach. The pilot or operator failed to meet that duty. Depending on the type of collision, this might include failing to maintain safe separation from another aircraft, improper or absent radio communication and coordination with air traffic control or other aircraft, disregarding applicable right-of-way rules, or failing to keep an adequate lookout while taxiing on the ground.

Causation. The pilot’s or operator’s breach actually caused the collision and the resulting injury, connecting the negligent conduct to the harm suffered.

Damages. The injured person suffered real, compensable harm, such as physical injury, medical expenses, or other losses, as a result of the collision.

Because evidence in these cases can include radio communications, radar or ADS-B tracking data, maintenance and inspection records, and reports from federal investigators, prompt evidence preservation and, often, coordination with aviation-specific experts are important steps early in a case.

Common Scenarios Aircraft Collision

The following scenarios are illustrative only and are not based on any particular incident or client:

A mid-air collision between two small aircraft. For example, two aircraft operating in shared airspace fail to maintain safe separation, resulting in a collision.

A collision during landing. A landing aircraft collides with another aircraft or an obstacle on or near the runway due to miscommunication between pilots and air traffic control, or a failure to follow standard traffic pattern procedures.

A ground collision while taxiing. Two aircraft collide while taxiing at an airport because of an inadequate lookout, poor coordination between pilots, or a failure to follow ground movement instructions.

Every case depends on its own facts, and these examples are meant only to show the types of situations that can give rise to a claim, not to describe any specific event.

Damages Available

A person injured in an aircraft collision may be able to recover several general categories of damages, depending on the facts of the case:

• Past and future medical expenses related to the injury
• Lost income or diminished earning capacity
• Physical pain and suffering
• Emotional distress
• Permanent impairment or disfigurement, where applicable
• Other losses directly tied to the injury

No specific dollar amounts or outcomes can be predicted in advance. The categories and amount of damages available will depend on the facts of the collision, the injuries involved, and other case-specific factors.

Sample Missouri Petition for Aircraft Collision Injury

The following is a generic, illustrative example for educational purposes only. It is not legal advice, is not based on any actual client or case, and any real petition must be tailored to the specific facts of a case by a licensed attorney.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF BOONE COUNTY, STATE OF MISSOURI

MARGARET A. HOLLOWAY, Plaintiff,

v. Case No. ____

DANIEL R. FESTNER, Serve at: [Address Placeholder]

and

FICTIONAL MIDWEST AVIATION SERVICES, LLC, Serve Registered Agent: [Registered Agent Placeholder] [Address Placeholder]

Defendants.

PETITION FOR DAMAGES

COMES NOW Plaintiff Margaret A. Holloway, by and through undersigned counsel, and for Plaintiff’s Petition for Damages against Defendants Daniel R. Festner and Fictional Midwest Aviation Services, LLC, states as follows:

PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE

Plaintiff Margaret A. Holloway is an individual residing in Boone County, Missouri.

Defendant Daniel R. Festner is, upon information and belief, an individual who at all relevant times acted as pilot-in-command of the aircraft described below.

Defendant Fictional Midwest Aviation Services, LLC (“Defendant Midwest Aviation”) is, upon information and belief, a limited liability company authorized to conduct business in the State of Missouri and, at all relevant times, owned, operated, or maintained the aircraft flown by Defendant Festner.

This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because the events giving rise to this Petition occurred in Boone County, Missouri, and Defendants regularly conduct business and aviation operations within this state.

Venue is proper in Boone County, Missouri because a substantial part of the events giving rise to this Petition occurred in Boone County, Missouri.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

On or about [Date Placeholder], Plaintiff was a passenger aboard a fixed-wing aircraft that was taxiing on a taxiway at a public airport located in Boone County, Missouri.

At the same time, Defendant Festner was piloting a separate aircraft, owned and maintained by Defendant Midwest Aviation, that was also taxiing on or near the same taxiway.

Defendant Festner failed to maintain an adequate lookout for other aircraft and failed to properly coordinate his aircraft’s movement with air traffic control and other aircraft in the vicinity.

As a direct result of the conduct described above, the aircraft piloted by Defendant Festner collided with the aircraft in which Plaintiff was a passenger.

As a direct and proximate result of the collision described above, Plaintiff was caused to strike parts of the aircraft’s interior, sustaining bodily injury.

Upon information and belief, Defendant Festner’s conduct at the time of the collision fell below the standard of care expected of a reasonably careful pilot operating an aircraft on the ground, including applicable aviation safety rules and procedures governing ground movement and lookout.

Upon information and belief, Defendant Midwest Aviation negligently entrusted its aircraft to Defendant Festner, negligently trained or supervised Defendant Festner, or negligently maintained the aircraft in a manner that contributed to the collision.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ negligence, Plaintiff suffered bodily injury, incurred medical expenses, experienced pain and suffering, and sustained other damages to be proven at trial.

COUNT I: NEGLIGENCE (Defendant Festner)

Plaintiff incorporates by reference each of the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.

Defendant Festner owed a duty to exercise reasonable care in the operation of his aircraft, including a duty to follow applicable aviation safety rules and procedures and to maintain an adequate lookout while taxiing.

Defendant Festner breached that duty by, among other things: a. Failing to maintain an adequate lookout for other aircraft while taxiing; b. Failing to properly communicate and coordinate with air traffic control and other aircraft; c. Disregarding applicable right-of-way and ground movement procedures; and d. Otherwise failing to exercise the degree of care required of a reasonably careful pilot.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Festner’s breach of duty, Plaintiff sustained the injuries and damages described herein.

COUNT II: NEGLIGENCE (Defendant Midwest Aviation)

Plaintiff incorporates by reference each of the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.

Defendant Midwest Aviation owed a duty to exercise reasonable care in the ownership, maintenance, and operation of its aircraft, and in the training and supervision of pilots operating that aircraft on its behalf.

Defendant Midwest Aviation breached that duty by, among other things, negligently entrusting its aircraft to Defendant Festner, failing to properly train or supervise Defendant Festner, and/or failing to properly maintain the aircraft.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Midwest Aviation’s breach of duty, Plaintiff sustained the injuries and damages described herein.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Margaret A. Holloway respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in Plaintiff’s favor and against Defendants Daniel R. Festner and Fictional Midwest Aviation Services, LLC, jointly and severally, for compensatory damages in an amount fair and reasonable under the circumstances, for costs incurred herein, for pre- and post-judgment interest as allowed by law, and for such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable.

Respectfully submitted,

[Attorney Name], Attorney for Plaintiff Mutrux Firm Injury Lawyers [Address Placeholder]

Frequently Asked Questions

How do FAA regulations factor into a case filed as a Missouri state-court negligence claim?

Even though the lawsuit itself is typically filed and litigated as an ordinary negligence claim in Missouri circuit court, federal aviation safety regulations often play an important role in establishing the standard of care, that is, what a reasonably careful pilot or operator was supposed to do. Evidence that a pilot violated an applicable federal regulation, or followed standard aviation safety practices, can be significant in showing whether a breach of duty occurred. This is a genuinely important nuance to understand early in a case.

Does it matter what phase of flight the collision happened in?

Yes. The specific safety rules and procedures that apply can differ depending on whether the collision happened in the air, during landing, or while taxiing on the ground, so identifying the phase of flight is an important early step in evaluating a claim.

Who can be held responsible for an aircraft collision?

Potentially responsible parties can include the pilot in command of either aircraft, the owner or operator of an aircraft, an air traffic control provider, or others involved in the operation of the aircraft, depending on the facts.

What evidence is important in an aircraft collision case?

Evidence can include radio communications, radar or tracking data, maintenance and inspection records, witness statements, and reports generated by federal investigators. Because much of this evidence may be time-sensitive or held by third parties, prompt evidence-preservation efforts are often important.

How long do I have to file a claim after an aircraft collision?

Deadlines can depend on the facts of the case, including who is being sued and where. Missouri generally allows five years for personal injury negligence claims, but different rules and shorter deadlines can apply depending on the parties involved. Because these timelines can vary, it is important not to delay in seeking legal advice after an aircraft collision injury.

Why Hire Mutrux Firm Injury Lawyers?

Aircraft collision cases require untangling standard Missouri negligence principles from the web of federal aviation safety regulations that often define what a pilot or operator should have done. Mutrux Firm Injury Lawyers, led by attorney Tyson Mutrux, helps injured clients understand how these rules may apply to their situation and what steps come next.

The firm’s approach to every case it takes on is simple: “Your Recovery is Our Fight,” with no fees unless you win.

If you or a loved one was injured in a mid-air, landing, or ground collision involving an aircraft, reach out to discuss your situation with a Missouri plane crash lawyer.

Mutrux Firm Injury Lawyers offices:

• St. Louis: 222 S Central Ave, Suite 550, St. Louis, MO 63105, (314) 270-2273
• Columbia: 2415 Carter Ln, Suite 102, Columbia, MO 65201, (573) 722-2121
• Toll-free: (888) 550-4026

Award Winning Personal Injury Law Firm

Tyson Mutrux is licensed to practice in Missouri, Illinois, and U.S. Federal Courts. He takes every case seriously, representing individuals in serious injury claims with precision and care.

Over the years, he has earned notable recognition, including:

• Best Injury Lawyer in Columbia for 2025, Inside Columbia Magazine
• Top 100 and Top 40 Under 40, The National Trial Lawyers (2014)
• The Nation’s Top One Percent of Attorneys, National Association of Distinguished Counsel (2015)
• Superb (10/10) Rating, Avvo (2012)
• Top 10 Car Accident Lawyers in Columbia, Trust Analytica (2024)
• Best Car Accident Lawyer in Columbia, Expertise.com (2023)

Tyson’s deep experience in personal injury law gives clients a meaningful edge. He regularly handles cases across Central and Eastern Missouri, and he offers pro bono legal support to military veterans. Tyson also remains actively involved with The Missouri Bar. Free consultations are available, and the office offers podcast resources and detailed settlement results for prospective clients. You can learn more on his attorney bio page.

You can also connect with us directly on Google to see reviews, updates, and more:

Mutrux Firm Injury Lawyers – St. Louis

Mutrux Firm Injury Lawyers – Columbia

We serve clients across Missouri and Illinois, with dedicated offices in St. Louis and Columbia.

Hurt in a Plane Crash or Ground Collision? Get Answers Now

Injured in a mid-air, landing, or taxiing aircraft collision in Missouri? Learn how these negligence claims work and what you must prove. Free case investigation.