The wife of a meteorologist who was killed in a helicopter crash last year in Charlotte, North Carolina, has filed a lawsuit against several companies connected to the crash.

The lawsuit was filed by Jillian Ann Myers in Mecklenburg County Court in Charlotte, North Carolina, and originally named the maintenance facility, Wilson Air Center-North Carolina, as the sole defendant. Total Traffic and Weather Network and iHeartMedia were added as defendants three days later.

The lawsuit claims that the named parties were negligent because of several preventative failures that could have ensured the safety of meteorologist Jason Myers and pilot Chip Tayag. Both Myers and the pilot died after the helicopter crashed alongside an interstate highway.

Tayag, who had over 20 years of experience as a pilot, was later recognized for his bravery as he was able to save the lives of drivers by diverting the helicopter so that it would crash alongside the interstate instead of directly on it. On the day of the crash, Johnny Jennings, chief of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department, shared in a statement, “The pilot is a hero in my eyes.”

The lawsuit, in contrast, argues that the pilot did not perform the necessary flight inspection and emergency failure checks properly. In failing to do so, the lawsuit argues the owners of the Robinson R44 helicopter are liable.

Whether the pilot's actions in diverting the crash away from the highway will be brought up at trial is uncertain, as it depends on the specific arguments of the parties and the admissibility of the evidence, says Paul Kistler, a California personal injury attorney whose firm handles a wide range of motor vehicle accident cases. “The fact that the pilot was hailed as a hero by the police chief might not be relevant to the issues of negligence and liability in the case,” he says.

Myers’ wife also argues that the aircraft was running on contaminated fuel which ultimately led to the engine failure. However, the initial findings issued by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) made no mention of any contaminated fuel. The NTSB's investigation is still pending and no probable cause has been identified.

“Defendant Wilson Air Center knew, or by using ordinary care should have known, that fuel contamination is a dangerous and unsafe condition that has caused numerous fatal helicopter crashes,” the lawsuit alleges. “Knowledge of this pervasive and dangerous fuel contamination conditions should have triggered a duty to carefully test all fuel loads for possible contamination; and resting revealed helicopters had contaminated and tainted fuel.”

Meyers was a Charlotte area meteorologist for the WBTV news channel while Tayag was employed by Total Traffic and Weather Network, a branch of parent company iHeartMedia. As attorney Kistler explains, in general, employers can be held liable for the negligence of their employees if the employee was acting within the scope of their employment at the time of the negligence. This is known in the law as vicarious liability or respondeat superior. “If the plaintiff can prove that the pilot was employed by the defendant companies at the time of the crash and that his negligence was related to his duties as a pilot, then the companies may be liable for any damages resulting from the crash,” Kistler says.

Gary Robb, Jillian Myers’ attorney, shared via a statement that the legal action “is about seeking answers as to what caused the helicopter crash and to hold the responsible parties fully accountable for Jason’s death.” Robb Also served as the attorney for Vanessa Bryant, the Widow of legendary basketball player Kobe Bryant after he, his daughter, and seven others died in a helicopter crash. That case was eventually settled under confidential terms.

Meyers is seeking compensatory damages including losses of her late husband’s net income, as well as punitive damages. Kistler explains that punitive damages are intended to punish a defendant for particularly egregious conduct and to deter similar behavior in the future. “They are not routinely awarded in every case,” says Kistler, “and a plaintiff must meet a higher burden of proof than in a typical negligence case.” Kistler goes on to explain, “In California, where I practice, a plaintiff must show that the defendant acted with "malice" or "reckless disregard" for the safety of others, rather than just simple negligence in failing to perform their duties. And the plaintiff needs to provide evidence that is “clear and convincing” to the jury, which is higher than “probable cause” the standard in simple negligence, although less than “beyond a reasonable doubt” the standard for a criminal conviction.”

The punitive damages statute in North Carolina contains language similar to that quoted by California attorney Kistler. Whether punitive damages are appropriate in this case is a matter to be decided by the jury should this case go to trial, as opposed to settling out of court.