Originally Posted by
Bell_ringer
OC was an operator, they just didn't have a large enough aircraft for this contract so they farmed the work out to Island. Not sure exactly how that plays out under US law.
From a regulatory side, OC claims they did not have operational control over the flight which is the deciding factor regardless who arranged the flight. OC states they only acted as a charter broker which is quite common in the business. Given OC did have its own 135 certificate and was an aircraft charter operator could be why they were included in the original court filing. And since a defendant's insurance company is usually listed as a separate entity in the court filing it seems to be a smart move on Endurance's part and may have a good chance of succeeding. Then with the policy payout taken off the table, OC may petition to be removed as well. Unfortunately when looking for "standards of care" in a civil proceeding who ever has money available will be included in that search. Had OC been just a standalone aircraft charter broker (which is not regulated) I doubt seriously they would have been included in the original filing as a charter broker is no different than a travel agent and they usually don't get directly sued if the flight they sold a ticket on crashes.