Patricia LaCourse, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Lt. Colonel Matthew LaCourse v. PAE Worldwide Incorporated, et al.

Did the Court of Appeals err in extending the federal common law “government contractor defense” established in Boyle v. United Technologies Corp., 487 U.S. 500 (1988) to a government maintenance contract where the contract gave the contractor sole discretion in performing a service and the Court of Appeals found that the contractor exercised that discretion in its contract performance?

Did the Court of Appeals err in creating a new standard for a litigant to defeat summary judgment by acknowledging that the facts were disputed but accepting the facts and reasonable inferences proffered by the party moving for summary judgment and refusing to accept those proffered by the non-moving party as required under Rule 56 of the FRCP?

Did the Court of Appeals err in extending the Death on the High Seas Act, 46 U.S.C. §§ 30301 et seq., to an aircraft accident with no maritime nexus when the cause of the crash occurred on land, the flight departed from land and was intended to return to the same place without a stop, and where the statute was never intended by Congress to embrace land-based aviation activities?

Did the Court of Appeals err in stripping the Plaintiff of her right to a jury trial by legislating from the bench that the Death on the High Seas Act, though unsaid, was meant to deny the parties a jury trial?