Cunningham Swaim, LLP Business & Aviation Law Firm | Dallas, TX , Pasadena, CA & Denver, CO, TX & Pasadena, CA2026-09-08T10:12:52Zhttps://www.cunninghamswaim.com/feed/atom/WordPressOn Behalf of Cunningham Swaim, LLP<![CDATA[How to respond to an FAA Letter of Investigation]]>https://www.cunninghamswaim.com/?p=482492026-09-08T10:12:52Z2026-09-08T10:12:52ZUnderstand what an FAA Letter of Investigation means
Inspectors send this document when they open an inquiry into a potential flight rule violation. This notice means the agency wants to collect facts. It is an inquiry rather than a final ruling or penalty.
The letter usually gives you 10 days to reply. You do not have a legal duty to send a written response or talk to inspectors. Any statement you submit can be used against you in future proceedings.
3 steps to take after receiving a notice
Protecting your pilot certificate requires immediate and calm action. Follow these basic steps right away:
Gather all flight logs, maintenance files and sensor data
Avoid phone calls or informal talks with inspectors
Work with an attorney to see what records you can legally request
Keeping your documents safe prevents claims that you destroyed evidence. Keeping your communication formal stops you from making accidental admissions on the phone.
Protect your airman certificate and commercial operations
Sending a report to the NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System within 10 days of an incident can protect you from penalties under FAA Advisory Circular 00-46F. This safety program is separate from the FAA investigation.
This report will not erase a finding of a violation. It can prevent the agency from suspending your license or charging you fines.
Seek guidance from an experienced aviation attorney
Federal administrative inquiries require careful planning before you send any written answers. Speaking with an aviation lawyer helps protect your flight privileges and guides your next steps.
]]>On Behalf of Cunningham Swaim, LLP<![CDATA[Cunningham Swaim Takes Second Defense Verdict in 25 Days; Dallas Jury Rejects $200,000 Contract Claim in Under Seven Minutes]]>https://www.cunninghamswaim.com/?p=482482026-08-27T17:59:03Z2026-08-27T17:59:03ZLipscher v. Western Healthcare, LLC — 192nd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, TexasDALLAS, Tex. — [August 26, 2026] — A Dallas County jury returned a complete defense verdict in favor of Western Healthcare, LLC on August 25, 2026, rejecting a $200,000 breach-of-contract claim after less than seven minutes of deliberation.The case, Randolph Lipscher, M.D. v. Western Healthcare, LLC, Cause No. DC-24-09786, was tried before Judge Maria Aceves in the 192nd Judicial District Court of Dallas County. The plaintiff, a physician, contracted with Western Healthcare — a national medical staffing company — for a COVID and disaster-relief assignment at a Laredo, Texas hospital. After the hospital asked that he be removed from the facility in March 2021, Western Healthcare ended the assignment. The plaintiff claimed the termination was without cause and without the contractual notice period and sought the full $200,000 he said the assignment was worth, plus attorney’s fees.Cunningham Swaim relished the chance to try the case on the contract. The parties’ Independent Contractor Agreement allowed Western Healthcare to terminate the assignment at its sole discretion if the client hospital requested the physician’s removal for reasons of professional incompetency or misconduct and limited his compensation to services actually performed. The jury no breach of the contract, and the plaintiff was awarded absolutely nothing.The defense was tried by David Denny of Cunningham Swaim, LLP.The verdict is the firm’s second complete defense verdict in 25 days. On July 31, 2026, a federal jury in Lafayette, Louisiana returned a full defense verdict for Westwind Helicopters in Romero v. Westwind Helicopters, No. 6:23-442 (W.D. La.), rejecting a $42 million demand after 37 minutes — a case tried by Ross Cunningham and David Denny. Denny tried both cases: a catastrophic-injury helicopter case in federal court in Louisiana, and a commercial contract case in Texas state court, twenty-five days apart.Ross Cunningham — “two defense verdicts in twenty-five days, and the two cases had nothing in common. We took a helicopter crash to a federal jury in Lafayette, and a hospital contract case to a state jury in Dallas, and neither jury needed an hour. Real trial lawyers are made by trying cases, not by talking about it. Two jury trials in less than a month – that’s the whole idea of this firm. We do not have a home courthouse. We go where the case is.”Multiple Cunningham Swaim partners are members of the American Board of Trial Advocates, an invitation-only organization that admits lawyers on the basis of a verified record of civil jury trials tried to verdict.Related: Cunningham Swaim Obtains Defense Verdict in Federal Helicopter Trial; Jury Rejects $42 Million Demand in 37 MinutesAbout Cunningham Swaim, LLPCunningham Swaim, LLP is a trial firm representing clients in aviation, insurance defense, business, and catastrophic injury litigation, with offices in Texas, California, Colorado, New York, and Utah. The firm’s aviation practice specializes in catastrophic wrongful death and personal injury trials, product liability, and insurance coverage.]]>On Behalf of Cunningham Swaim, LLP<![CDATA[Difference between trademark dilution and trademark infringement]]>https://www.cunninghamswaim.com/?p=482332026-08-27T13:40:52Z2026-08-27T13:40:52ZThe uniqueness of a trademark must be guarded carefully; failing to do so can cause irreversible damage to your brand. If you suspect someone is misusing your trademark, it is important to understand the difference between trademark dilution and trademark infringement. Here is what you need to know.
What is trademark infringement?
Trademark infringement generally involves unauthorized use of a mark that is likely identical or similar to yours, which causes confusion among customers about the source or origin of goods. The owner of the mark usually shares the burden of proving that the trademark used by another party is similar enough to confuse their customers.
What is trademark dilution?
Trademark dilution operates differently. It is invoked when someone uses a mark that is similar to yours, which either harms your brand reputation or distorts the association consumers have with it. In legal language, this is known as:
Blurring: Use of a similar mark that weakens the distinctiveness of a famous mark by creating an association with another source.
Tarnishment: Use of a famous mark in a way that creates an association with products or services that harms the mark's reputation.
Under the Trademark Dilution Revision Act, only famous marks that are widely recognized by the general consuming public qualify for federal dilution protection.
Establishing the facts
U.S. trademark law provides meaningful protections against both infringement and dilution, but neither claim is automatic. Infringement requires a demonstrable likelihood of confusion, while dilution requires proving fame and harm to distinctiveness or reputation. Courts scrutinize these facts closely. An attorney experienced in fighting trademark infringement and dilution can help you build a strong case against the infringing party.]]>On Behalf of Cunningham Swaim, LLP<![CDATA[What is tortious interference with a business relationship?]]>https://www.cunninghamswaim.com/?p=482312026-08-17T11:12:14Z2026-08-20T11:11:32ZUnderstanding tortious interference
Texas recognizes tortious interference under common law. These claims usually involve one of two situations. The first involves an existing contract. The second involves a future business relationship that was likely to happen.
These claims are not the same. They have different legal requirements. A lost customer or failed deal does not always mean someone acted unlawfully. Courts look at the facts before deciding whether a claim exists.
What courts may review
Courts may consider whether someone:
Intentionally caused another person to break a contract
Made false statements that damaged a business relationship
Used independently wrongful or unlawful conduct to block a likely business opportunity
Caused financial harm through improper actions instead of fair competition
Texas courts apply different rules to each type of claim. Cases involving existing contracts focus on whether someone intentionally interfered with the agreement and caused damages. Cases involving future business relationships usually require proof that the person used conduct that was independently wrongful or unlawful. The Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Section 16.003(a) also sets the time limit for filing certain tort claims. Waiting too long may affect a business's ability to pursue a claim.
Why records are important
Business records can help explain what happened. Contracts, emails, invoices and other documents may show how a relationship developed and when problems began. Good records can also help show the difference between fair competition and conduct that may support a legal claim.
Looking ahead
Not every business dispute is tortious interference. Competition is a normal part of doing business. Still, wrongful conduct that disrupts contracts or likely business opportunities can lead to legal claims. Understanding these basic rules can help business owners make informed decisions when disputes arise. If you have questions about this topic, consider reaching out to a legal professional for guidance.
]]>On Behalf of Cunningham Swaim, LLP<![CDATA[3 risks airlines shouldn’t take while hiring pilots]]>https://www.cunninghamswaim.com/?p=482282026-08-17T11:12:28Z2026-08-20T11:11:23ZThe stakes are exceptionally high in the aviation industry. There is truly no room for error, especially when hiring pilots. Airlines face the risk of direct negligence claims if bad hiring practices lead to accidents.
Inadequate background screening
Airlines have to check a pilot’s background before letting them fly. By law, it is mandatory for them to verify the candidate’s qualifications and disciplinary history through the Pilot Records Database (PRD). They should also make sure that the candidate passes the Federal Aviation Administration’s drug and alcohol tests. This step helps the airlines to identify the candidate’s prior substance-related offenses.
Lowering application standards
When facing applicant shortages, some airlines may try to lower their internal hiring standards. While this doesn’t necessarily violate any aviation law, they should make sure they are not below the standards set by the FAA. Airlines should bridge any gap in skill or experience with extra training. This ensures that only qualified candidates make it to the cockpit.
Using unvalidated or outdated selection systems
Simple interviews and basic written tests are not enough. Federal rules require proven, structured testing that predicts how a pilot acts during a real flight crisis. Retaining poor trainees or using weak testing tools creates major legal risks. If an accident happens because of human error, the airline could be held legally responsible.
How a legal guide may help
Airlines can avoid huge liabilities by screening thoroughly, updating training and using proven tests. Yet, many hidden legal traps still exist. Partnering with a skilled aviation attorney gives airlines the tools they need to stay safe and compliant.]]>On Behalf of Cunningham Swaim, LLP<![CDATA[Cunningham Swaim Obtains Defense Verdict in Federal Helicopter Trial; Jury Rejects $42 Million Demand in 37 Minutes]]>https://www.cunninghamswaim.com/?p=482342026-08-17T19:29:03Z2026-08-17T19:24:43ZRomero v. Westwind Helicopters — U.S. District Court, Western District of Louisiana
LAFAYETTE, La. — [August 14, 2026] — A federal jury returned a full defense verdict on liability in favor of Westwind Helicopters on July 31, 2026, rejecting a $42 million demand after 37-minutes of deliberation.
The case, Romero v. Westwind Helicopters, No. 6:23-442, was tried before Judge S. Maurice Hicks in the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. The plaintiff, a telecommunications contractor, was seriously injured when a Bell 407 helicopter transporting him from an offshore platform in the Gulf of Mexico crashed after the pilot suffered an in-flight medical event. The plaintiff claimed that the pilot had experienced an earlier episode approximately 15-minutes before losing consciousness, and that he should have aborted the flight or returned to the platform.
The defense was tried by Ross Cunningham and David Denny of Cunningham Swaim, LLP.
Ross Cunningham – “the demand did not survive contact with the evidence, and it was never going to. Cases like this get settled every day for numbers nobody tests. Our client was resolute to try it, and thirty-seven minutes is what the jury thought of the claim."
The verdict was reported as the lead item in the August 2026 edition of The Louisiana Jury Verdict Reporter (17 LaJVR 8), a neutral publication covering civil jury verdicts across the state.
Multiple Cunningham Swaim partners are members of the American Board of Trial Advocates, an invitation-only organization that admits lawyers on the basis of a verified record of civil jury trials tried to verdict. The firm represents airlines, aircraft manufacturers, operators, maintenance and repair organizations, component suppliers, pilots, mechanics and their insurers in matters involving fixed-wing aircraft, helicopters and unmanned systems.
About Cunningham Swaim, LLP
Cunningham Swaim, LLP is a trial firm representing clients in aviation, insurance defense, business and catastrophic injury litigation, with offices in Texas, California, Colorado, New York, and Utah. The firm's aviation practice specializes in catastrophic wrongful death and personal injury trials, product liability, and insurance coverage.
Read The Louisiana Jury Verdict Reporter Here]]>On Behalf of Cunningham Swaim, LLP<![CDATA[Trademark infringement can damage a successful brand]]>https://www.cunninghamswaim.com/?p=482262026-07-16T12:43:58Z2026-07-16T12:43:58ZConsumers may not know the difference
The main issue with trademark infringement is how consumers might judge because of trademark infringement. Those who buy knock-off products or receive cut-rate services from a company imitating a successful business may blame the successful company for the conduct of the unethical competitor.
In some cases, consumers may contact a company requesting refunds or replacement products. They may leave negative reviews online. They may even make returns to retailers, who may reduce their orders from a successful brand or may stop carrying their products.
Companies can take legal action in response to knock-off products or packaging that uses their trademark without permission. Trademark litigation may lead to an injunction preventing additional infringement or awarding the affected company damages for the harm caused.
Documenting trademark infringement and acting promptly to address it can limit the likelihood of an outside company permanently damaging a brand's reputation. An attorney familiar with intellectual property registration and enforcement actions can help businesses limit the damage caused by trademark infringement and other violations of their intellectual property rights.]]>On Behalf of Cunningham Swaim, LLP<![CDATA[When to seek emergency injunctive relief in a business dispute]]>https://www.cunninghamswaim.com/?p=482252026-07-10T12:27:20Z2026-07-10T12:27:20ZWhat qualifies as irreparable harm?
Irreparable harm means the damage goes beyond what any monetary judgment can address. If a court can quantify your losses and award them at trial, most courts will deny emergency relief regardless of how serious the misconduct was.
Your case is strongest when the harm is actively compounding and impossible to measure fully:
Your competitive position is eroding in ways no damage calculation can capture.
Your trade secrets are already exposed and cannot be recalled.
A critical business relationship is being permanently destroyed.
Your brand is taking reputational damage by the day.
You should move for emergency relief when waiting will cost you more than the lawsuit itself. These are the situations where courts are most likely to grant it:
A departing executive took your confidential data or proprietary processes to a competitor
A former partner is diverting business opportunities or assets in breach of fiduciary duties
Ongoing IP infringement is actively eroding your market position
Recognizing your situation in this list is only the first step. What you do in the hours and days that follow will define your legal position.
Why does timing matter?
Courts treat unexplained delay as direct evidence that the harm is not truly irreparable. If you discovered the misconduct weeks ago and are only filing now, expect that gap to be the first thing the other side raises. Courts have denied TROs on delay grounds alone, even when the underlying claim was strong.
The window to act is short. The moment you suspect something is wrong, that is also the moment to start building your legal position. Seeking legal guidance early can help you understand your options before the window closes.]]>On Behalf of Cunningham Swaim, LLP<![CDATA[Are helicopters more dangerous than planes?]]>https://www.cunninghamswaim.com/?p=482242026-07-02T13:45:53Z2026-07-07T13:45:25ZFor the average person, plane flights are certainly more common than helicopter flights. Many people have flown on airliners multiple times, for example, even if they have never been in a helicopter in their lives. This may contribute to the perception that helicopters are more dangerous, simply because people do not have as much experience with them.
But there is also a statistical correlation. The crash rate for helicopters is generally higher than that for airplanes, per the Federal Aviation Administration. Even among airplane accidents, small aircraft go down more often than large airliners, so helicopter crashes are certainly more common than commercial plane accidents. Helicopters have been getting safer, but some level of risk remains.
The role of pilot error
One thing that people point out about helicopter crashes, though, is that many of them are attributed to pilot error. For instance, a pilot may misread the weather conditions and operate their aircraft in a way that is unsafe, further increasing the accident risk.A related issue is that operating a helicopter often requires intense concentration for an extended period of time. Once a plane has taken off and reached cruising altitude, for example, pilots may even be able to use autopilot or other automated features. In a helicopter, by contrast, the pilot is always in control of the aircraft, so this long-term concentration is critical. A lapse could cause a helicopter accident.Aviation accidents can certainly be complex, especially when dealing with insurance companies and regulating government bodies, like the FAA. It can help to work with an experienced attorney while navigating this system.
]]>On Behalf of Cunningham Swaim, LLP<![CDATA[Does an appeal usually lead to a new trial?]]>https://www.cunninghamswaim.com/?p=482202026-06-04T11:57:54Z2026-06-01T17:52:35ZAppeals are not the same as trials
An appeal is a judicial review by a higher court. The party appealing a lower court ruling generally needs to provide a basis for the appeal, such as a mistake in the interpretation of the law or deviations from best practices during court proceedings.
The appellate courts consider whether a lower court may have made mistakes when interpreting the law. They can also rule on violations of court standards, such as claims that jurors or a judge came into the trial with a pre-existing bias or conflict of interest that they failed to disclose.
The appeals process may result in a judge reversing the decision of a lower court or returning the matter to the lower court to reconsider after providing context and legal guidance for that new determination. Occasionally, appeals may lead to the courts determining that a new trial is appropriate, but there is no guarantee of a new trial even if an appeal is successful.
Understanding the appellate process can be beneficial for those frustrated by the outcome of civil litigation. Working with an attorney familiar with appellate law can help business leaders, professionals and others understand their rights when they believe that the outcome of a civil case was inappropriate.]]>