Question

Windy City Balloon Port ran a balloon launching facility in Illinois, offering sightseeing flights in hot-air and helium balloons owned by third parties. Windy City sold tickets for the balloon rides for $100 per person per ride. The pilot of the balloon would receive $60 directly from Windy City for each ticket sold. Although Windy City provided refueling and repair facilities for the balloons and canceled flights when weather conditions were unsafe, Windy City had no control over the flights once they left port. One day, a balloon piloted by Stevenson left the launch site carrying 6 passengers. It struck power lines and crashed killing everyone on board. Family members of deceased passengers sued for wrongful deaths. One of the issues that had to be resolved before liability could be assessed was whether Windy City and Stevenson were involved in a joint venture. What should the court rule on the issue of whether this was a joint venture? Discuss fully.

Answer 1

The issue in the scenario is whether or not Windy City Balloon Port and Stevenson were involved in a joint venture. A joint venture can refers to when two or more persons or business entities combine their efforts or their property in regard to a single transaction or project or a related series of transactions or projects.

Here although Windy City Balloon Port once left the port, does not hold control over the balloon flights, thus the balloon launching facility does combine with the balloon flights to be a single transaction. Within such transaction, Windy City holds the control of launching facility and selling the tickets, while Stevenson manages the balloon flights, Windy City shares profits with Stevenson. Windy City sells the rides for $100 per person per ride. Of that $100, Stevenson receives the amount of $60 for the balloon rides he flies. As Windy City and Stevenson combine in a single transaction and share profits, thus can be categorized as been involved in a joint venture.

Because they are governed by the contract agreement and the contract law among the parties to a joint venture, thus thawe liability that binds the parties to a joint venture is very clear and formal. Injuries that have suffered to third parties in a joint venture need to be liable and all the parties of a joint venture should held liable equally for the damages that occurred. Furthermore a respondeat superior is a common-law doctrine that makes an employer liable for the actions of an employee wherein the action of employees has taken place within the scope of employment. The relation of employer and employee is defined as of a principal and agent, thus the employer is held liable for damages of all acts of the employee within the employment scope. Hence both Windy City and Stevenson are liable to the family members of the deceased passengers who sued for wrongful deaths