After 18 years of great pleasure in owning and flying our B model my dad and I are planning to sell it. I am not sure what paper work is required. I know I need the bill of sale form but is seems I read something about a "Sales Contract" but I am not sure what that is. Does anybody have a copy of a generic one I could use? Are there any other forms required?
Thanks,
Doug
Sales Contract
Moderators: GAHorn, Karl Towle, Bruce Fenstermacher
-
Doug Echelberger
- Posts: 15
- Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2002 4:03 am
Sales Contract
Doug
N2426D
North Calif.
N2426D
North Calif.
-
zero.one.victor
- Posts: 2271
- Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 12:11 am
Be certain your sales contract includes "Sold as is, where is, without warranty as to fitness of purpose or merchantibility." and "This sale and contract is subject only to the laws of the U.S. and (your state)" .
That way if anyone ever does attempt to sue you for any reason over the sale, at least they will have to do so in YOUR state, not theirs.
Prior to selling your aircraft, you may wish to purchase insurance thru EAA or certain other insurers, who automatically offer continued protection for you after the sale. (Example: You sell your plane, it later crashes and kills someone due to CO poisioning, and the cause was determined to be an exhaust leak and your hangar neighbor told some Pvt-eye that he once saw you repairing your own exhaust. You are named as a defendant for having overlooked the maintenance errors, etc.)
(P.S. - I am not a lawyer and do not offer the above comments as legal advice.)
That way if anyone ever does attempt to sue you for any reason over the sale, at least they will have to do so in YOUR state, not theirs.
Prior to selling your aircraft, you may wish to purchase insurance thru EAA or certain other insurers, who automatically offer continued protection for you after the sale. (Example: You sell your plane, it later crashes and kills someone due to CO poisioning, and the cause was determined to be an exhaust leak and your hangar neighbor told some Pvt-eye that he once saw you repairing your own exhaust. You are named as a defendant for having overlooked the maintenance errors, etc.)
(P.S. - I am not a lawyer and do not offer the above comments as legal advice.)
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
Doug, I agree with Eric. I've yet to meet a pilot who didn't regret selling a 170.
George, I know you are not a lawyer and, as it happens, neither am I. However, from reading the forums, I also know that you are happy to be corrected on that rare occasion when one of your posts is inaccurate. So (deep breath), here goes.
Your advice to Doug may be flawed in its interpretation of what your recommended language would accomplish. You suggest that if his contract includes a statement that "[t]his sale and contract is subject only to the laws of the U.S. and ([his] state)" then "if anyone ever does attempt to sue [him] for any reason over the sale, at least they will have to do so in [HIS] state, not theirs."
I believe you are confusing a contract's applicable law provision with jurisdiction, a particular court's power to hear and decide a case. They are not the same thing.
Federal courts are not limited to hearing cases involving federal laws. When they hear cases involving state law, they simply apply state law to the case. Similarly, state courts are not prevented from hearing cases involving federal law or contracts made in other states. I don't believe contract language can interfere with a courts superior right to properly hear a particular case.
Jurisdiction issues can become extremely complex, and deciding which of many possible trial venues to file a case in is commonly known as "forum shopping." In the post-sale crash scenario you describe, it is entirely possible that the accident happened in a state other than the one in which the sale took place, involved a vacationing citizen of a third state, and (almost certainly with a death involved) produced damages in excess of $75,000 dollars.
In such a case, the accident victim's survivors have at least two choices as to where they file their suit. Because of the diversity of citizenship (and the amount of damages involved), they could sue in federal court in their home state. Alternately, they could sue in state court in the state where the accident took place.
I do agree with you, George, that Doug should put an applicable law provision in his contract. It could read: "The parties hereby agree this contract shall be governed and interpreted according to the laws of the State of X."
This advice is based on the assumption that, if Doug needs to hire an attorney to represent him in a matter relating to the contract, he will most likely hire an attorney from state X and the attorney will be most familiar with the laws of state X.
However, Doug should not expect such a provision to have an effect on either the state in which a law suit might be filed or on whether that suit is filed in federal or state court.
The good news is that it is extremely unlikely (although not impossible) that anything like the above-given scenario will occur. At any rate, I hope Doug is not losing any sleep over it.
(P.S. - I am not a lawyer and do not offer the above comments as legal advice––nor do I know anything about anything, but sometimes I'm fooled into thinking I do.)
Gordon Sandy
Ragwing, N4002V
Willie and LuLu (blue heeler and border collie)
George, I know you are not a lawyer and, as it happens, neither am I. However, from reading the forums, I also know that you are happy to be corrected on that rare occasion when one of your posts is inaccurate. So (deep breath), here goes.
Your advice to Doug may be flawed in its interpretation of what your recommended language would accomplish. You suggest that if his contract includes a statement that "[t]his sale and contract is subject only to the laws of the U.S. and ([his] state)" then "if anyone ever does attempt to sue [him] for any reason over the sale, at least they will have to do so in [HIS] state, not theirs."
I believe you are confusing a contract's applicable law provision with jurisdiction, a particular court's power to hear and decide a case. They are not the same thing.
Federal courts are not limited to hearing cases involving federal laws. When they hear cases involving state law, they simply apply state law to the case. Similarly, state courts are not prevented from hearing cases involving federal law or contracts made in other states. I don't believe contract language can interfere with a courts superior right to properly hear a particular case.
Jurisdiction issues can become extremely complex, and deciding which of many possible trial venues to file a case in is commonly known as "forum shopping." In the post-sale crash scenario you describe, it is entirely possible that the accident happened in a state other than the one in which the sale took place, involved a vacationing citizen of a third state, and (almost certainly with a death involved) produced damages in excess of $75,000 dollars.
In such a case, the accident victim's survivors have at least two choices as to where they file their suit. Because of the diversity of citizenship (and the amount of damages involved), they could sue in federal court in their home state. Alternately, they could sue in state court in the state where the accident took place.
I do agree with you, George, that Doug should put an applicable law provision in his contract. It could read: "The parties hereby agree this contract shall be governed and interpreted according to the laws of the State of X."
This advice is based on the assumption that, if Doug needs to hire an attorney to represent him in a matter relating to the contract, he will most likely hire an attorney from state X and the attorney will be most familiar with the laws of state X.
However, Doug should not expect such a provision to have an effect on either the state in which a law suit might be filed or on whether that suit is filed in federal or state court.
The good news is that it is extremely unlikely (although not impossible) that anything like the above-given scenario will occur. At any rate, I hope Doug is not losing any sleep over it.
(P.S. - I am not a lawyer and do not offer the above comments as legal advice––nor do I know anything about anything, but sometimes I'm fooled into thinking I do.)
Gordon Sandy
Ragwing, N4002V
Willie and LuLu (blue heeler and border collie)
Quite right, Gordon, one may be sued in any state over anything the court will accept jurisdiction over. However, the statement being discussed was limited specifically to the laws governing the SALE/CONTRACT, ... that the SALE and the particular CONTRACT would limit which courts would find they have jurisdiction over contractural issues. (nothing to do with the ultimate use of the aircraft or the location of that use,...which by the way, was already disclaimed in the prior statement.)
As you mention, it would have little to do over a crash or anything else that occurred in Timbuktu where Timbuktu courts would likely find they have jurisdiction. (The sale/contract exclusion would not be applicable to the crash example I used. I did not intend to imply it would. That example was in reference to purchasing insurance that would protect the seller from liabilities of prior ownership.)
At least thats the way my atty explained it to me when we sold my last plane. (Of course, that advice is worth what you, Doug, or I all paid for it.....and since it was a friend of mine ...I paid him nothing for it.) (At least I thought he was a friend. Hmm.)
But maybe he got paid what it was worth after all!
As you mention, it would have little to do over a crash or anything else that occurred in Timbuktu where Timbuktu courts would likely find they have jurisdiction. (The sale/contract exclusion would not be applicable to the crash example I used. I did not intend to imply it would. That example was in reference to purchasing insurance that would protect the seller from liabilities of prior ownership.)
At least thats the way my atty explained it to me when we sold my last plane. (Of course, that advice is worth what you, Doug, or I all paid for it.....and since it was a friend of mine ...I paid him nothing for it.) (At least I thought he was a friend. Hmm.)
But maybe he got paid what it was worth after all!
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
George, I have never heard that a contract provision can limit the jurisdiction of a particular court if it is that court's opinion that it has jurisdiction over a legal matter arising from that contract.
However, such language may convince the other party (but probably not their attorney) that you have limited their choice of forum.
It is my belief that you may stipulate a reasonable choice as to what law will govern a court's interpretation of the contract, but you cannot limit a court's otherwise valid jurisdiction by the use of contractual language.
That said, all my prior disclaimers apply.
Gordon Sandy
Ragwing, N4002V
Willie and LuLu (blue heeler and border collie)
However, such language may convince the other party (but probably not their attorney) that you have limited their choice of forum.
It is my belief that you may stipulate a reasonable choice as to what law will govern a court's interpretation of the contract, but you cannot limit a court's otherwise valid jurisdiction by the use of contractual language.
That said, all my prior disclaimers apply.
Gordon Sandy
Ragwing, N4002V
Willie and LuLu (blue heeler and border collie)