Justin Green on His Path from the Cockpit to the Courtroom

This transcript of Raising the Bar with RebuttalPR was generated using AI transcription and lightly edited for readability. It may contain errors, and speaker labels are approximate. The audio recording is the authoritative version.

In this episode of Raising the Bar, we discuss aviation safety and litigation with Justin Green. This episode was recorded prior to the recent tragedy at Reagan National Airport. RebuttalPR extends our deepest condolences to the victims, their families, and all those affected by this heartbreaking event. While these conversations are intended to provide insight and analysis, we understand that this may be a difficult topic for some at this time. If you prefer to skip this episode, we completely understand and invite you to join us for the next one. Our thoughts remain with everyone impacted.

Welcome to Raising the Bar with RebuttalPR, the podcast where we elevate the stories of the plaintiff's bar and dive into the key trends shaping the civil justice system today. I'm your host, Ray DeLorenzi, and in each episode, we'll bring you insightful interviews with leading attorneys, expert perspectives on current legal events, and in-depth discussions on the issues that matter most. Now let's jump in.

We're looking at some accidents that were avoidable, and going forward similar accidents must be avoided. You know, 98% safety means hundreds of people die. Perfection is the goal. And so that's what everyone who's really interested in aviation safety is working towards.

Ray: Welcome to a new episode of Raising the Bar with RebuttalPR. I'm Ray DeLorenzi, and today I'm joined by Justin Green, who is a partner with the Kreindler firm in New York. He is one of this country's leading aviation attorneys on behalf of victims of aviation accidents. It's a real pleasure to have Justin here with us today. Thank you, Justin, for joining the podcast.

Justin: Oh, it's a pleasure to be here with you, and thanks for having me.

Ray: You know, what I want to start with is: you have lawyers, let's say, who do medical malpractice cases and they're not doctors typically. And lawyers who do auto cases and they're typically not experts, they're not mechanics. You are an aviation attorney and you know how to fly planes and helicopters. I want you to take us back to when you were younger and when you got the interest in not only aviation, but also in service, as I know you were in the Marines as well.

Justin: Sure. Well, I grew up, I wasn't really particularly interested in aviation, but I got talked into joining the Marine Corps. And the same guy who talked me into joining the Marine Corps talked me into applying for and qualifying for flight school. So once I joined the Marine Corps and spent some time in the mud carrying packs — every Marine has to become a rifleman, or a rifle person, I guess, nowadays — flight school sounded like a really good idea. So I ended up going down to Pensacola, Florida, trained in Corpus Christi, Texas, got my wings in Pensacola, and ended up out in the Fleet Marine Corps. I flew attack helicopters, but because of the training I received in the Marines, I qualified as a commercial fixed-wing and commercial helicopter pilot. So I have, you know, thousands of hours total, but in both fixed wing and helicopters.

Ray: So, you know, you're in the Marines and you're told, hey, we think you can go to flight school. What's your reaction at the time? Did you fly as a kid at all, or did it come out of left field? Was it something you had even pondered?

Justin: No, it's interesting because a lot of the men and women who end up in flight school have dreamt their whole lives of becoming a pilot. And for me, it was a little bit of a detour. I had never flown before. I never had a flight lesson. I never had ground training. You know, I was young, I was 19 when I joined the Marines. But the training, starting with ground training that included aerodynamics, physical training, and then obviously the flight training, was really first class. I think they say they spend like a million dollars to train every pilot, and I don't doubt it. Between the ground training, the flight training, the simulator training, it's a great education.

Ray: Was there a moment in that training when you fell in love with it and you were like, this is for me — that moment that stands out to you?

Justin: I really was into instrument flying. You start off with familiarization flights, and it goes pretty quickly. It's about 14 flights. By the third one, you're landing the airplane. Once you finish that, you do a solo flight. And so, basically a month or so after you've first flown, they give you the keys. You know, there's no keys, but they let you take out a pretty advanced aircraft, a turbo propeller aircraft back in the day and still now. And you get to go fly around and land yourself without anyone controlling. I assume my on-wing was probably on the ground sweating bricks while I was up.

And then after the familiarization stage, you go to instrument flying, you do aerobatic flying, and then ultimately you finish primary. And once you finish primary, you basically select for the intermediate-level school, which for me ended up being helicopters, and you go through the whole process all over again. And then once you finish that, you get your wings, which is, you know, a very happy day. If you went straight through, you'd probably finish it in six to eight months, but you have downtimes along the way, so it might take up to a year.

Once you finish your wings, you're not done though. All you know how to fly is trainer aircraft. So you go out to the fleet, and once you're in the fleet, you actually fly combat aircraft. And so there's a — we call it a rag squadron. It's a replacement air group squadron. And you basically go through another training series to learn how to fly your combat aircraft. I ended up flying Cobras, which are the modern Cobras — the Marine Corps doesn't fly Apaches. So it's an attack helicopter; it carries Hellfire missiles, rockets, 20-millimeter cannon. And flying that, and not only flying that aircraft but the mission profile, was really something else. You can't get that in civilian flying.

Ray: Yeah, well, you hope you don't, at least, I guess. Right. When in that journey — you know, a lot of military pilots become commercial pilots, and it's like a natural step when they leave the service. You decided to become a lawyer. Where does that intersect in your journey?

Justin: Well, I became the aviation safety officer for my squadron. I ended up going to the Naval Postgraduate School for the Aviation Safety Officers course, which is a terrific course. It teaches you how to do accident investigations and manage safety programs. And flying in the military is not without risk, and managing the risk was really an important part of my job. We had a crash while I was an aviation safety officer. I was involved in a major investigation. We lost four members of our squadron. I had involvement in other lesser investigations.

But what really drove me to wanting to go to aviation safety school was: I was involved in a Class A mishap when a landing gear of the Cobra that I was in broke when we were landing out in the field, and the aircraft flipped. So we were able to get out, but the aircraft was on fire and had probably about 150 rounds of 20 millimeters still in the box. So not only were we able to get out of an upside-down burning helicopter, but for the next hour and a half we sat in a ditch and had to wait until the 20-millimeter rounds cooked off, just like popcorn.

So after that — and I went through that on the wrong side of the investigation, and we were cleared of any blame; it was a mechanical problem — that got me interested in aviation safety and applying for the aviation safety course, which is a sought-after job. In the squadron, we all flew, but everyone had collateral jobs. So somebody would be the operations officer; I served as operations officer. And then there's NATOPS, which is essentially standardization — they want to make sure everyone flies safely in the same way. And then aviation safety. So it was an important job, and I was very happy to get it.

My first job in the squadron was less important. I was a substance abuse control officer, SACO. I went to school for a week to learn how to administer urinalysis exams and give lectures on how to avoid drugs. And my first job as a brand-new lieutenant pilot — my side job — was once every month I'd have to surprise everyone with a urinalysis examination.

Ray: Sure, that made you a popular figure.

Justin: No, I mean, nobody did drugs. Unfortunately, no one ever popped positive, but it was a pain. I think they understood it was a bigger pain for me than it was for them.

Ray: Yeah. So, when does law school come into the picture?

Justin: So I went to Desert Storm, and when I got back, I was facing getting out of the cockpit. The career path is you spend a certain number of years in the squadron, then you go and do something else, and then you get back to the squadron as a major, and then hopefully you'll end up being a lieutenant colonel. So I was looking at a non-flying tour, either in Washington or maybe even as a forward area controller with the infantry. And it's not something I'd have really wanted to do at the time. I had all this aviation safety experience, and I thought it was either going to be trying to do a career with the airlines or in aviation safety, or going to law school and trying to use the lessons learned from my time in the military and with aviation to benefit my clients. So that's what I decided to do.

Ray: So, was there a moment — you know, you can be a lawyer, you can specialize in aviation and do all sorts of things, but representing crash victims was the route you chose. Was there a point where you're like, that's the route I want to go, versus, let's say, working in government and being a lawyer there?

Justin: Yeah, I wanted to do something in aviation safety, and that to me meant something related to accidents or accident prevention. I went to school here in New York at Fordham Law School, and while I was at Fordham I actually clerked at Kreindler & Kreindler as a law student, working on some of the cases. And then when I graduated, I clerked for a federal judge in New Jersey. I had some offers from big defense firms defending companies after accidents, but I kind of felt like I could make more of an impact working on the plaintiff side and standing for the people who had suffered the most and had the most interest in making changes that would improve safety. And it's funny — I always say I was in the Marines, I clerked for a federal judge, I worked briefly at a defense firm while I was in school and before my clerkship. But my whole life, I've had basically three jobs. And I've been at Kreindler & Kreindler for 95% of my career.

Ray: So, I want to talk a little bit later on — there's obviously been some high-profile incidents involving aircraft, but many would say it's one of the safest eras in aviation history. How do you square that with representing victims of crashes when so many experts say it's extremely safe to be flying right now?

Justin: Well, that argument — there are two things. One is it's true. Aviation is safe. Commercial aviation is probably among the safest things there are. You probably are more at risk driving to the airport than flying on the airplane. But the goal of aviation safety, and what I learned early on in my training, was zero accidents. It wasn't okay to have an accident in my squadron; the goal is having zero. And looking at aviation generally, we're looking at some accidents that were avoidable, and going forward similar accidents must be avoided. And you're also looking at a lot of near-mid-air collisions, a lot of near-runway incursions. And the key is 100% safety. You know, 98% safety means hundreds of people die. So perfection is the goal. And that's what everyone who's really interested in aviation safety is working towards. It's not okay to have a couple of avoidable accidents a year.

Ray: So you investigated accidents when you were in the Marines. And in the civilian world, the NTSB is in charge of that, which is viewed as the best aviation safety authority in the world, and I know you've had a lot of direct experience with them. Sort of a two-part question. When you were in the military, were you seen as someone who was looking to blame someone, and was there any defensiveness in your role? And how does that compare to the NTSB essentially finding not someone to blame, but trying to pull back the onion and figure out what happened? How do those things compare?

Justin: So, as an aviation safety officer — the military had two different investigations. They had a safety investigation, a mishap investigation, that was led usually by a colonel, but a team that would include an aviation safety officer, a maintenance officer, a NATOPS standardization officer, and that was only for safety. So I would go out — and I should say the second investigation is the justice investigation, where they may be looking to prosecute. So on the safety side, I would actually go out and interview a witness as the aviation safety officer. And then after I'm done, the JAG officer who was doing the justice investigation, he or she would then interview the same witness.

So the idea is: you can tell me anything. What you tell me goes into the safety report; it can't be used to prosecute you. And then when the JAG officer comes in, that's not the case. If you say, I was drunk and I was in the airplane, you're going to get court-martialed. So our investigations were more like the NTSB investigation. The NTSB is supposed to be about safety; their actual reports can't be used in litigation. So I would say the military investigation I was involved with may even be more protective of the people and more directed at safety than even the NTSB investigations.

Ray: Something that you or another attorney once told me about aviation accidents — and you could take the Ethiopian Air crash as an example — these planes crash at such high speeds often, and these people die so suddenly, but also there's often no remains for their family. Tell me about meeting these families and working with them through a multi-year process to get justice for a loved one, and how that weighs on you and all those factors that go into your representation of them.

Justin: You know, it can be really difficult. I've had a number of clients who never received remains of their loved ones, whether that's in aviation accidents or in the 9/11 terror attacks. In fact, I had a client in 9/11 whose loved one's name showed up on a hospital as an admitted patient, but they never found him, because it was a mistake with the hospital record. Someone had called in and they were put on the intake forms when they were never there. So it's very, very difficult.

And a lot of times you don't want to believe you've lost someone. So for weeks or even months after the crash, the families are hoping maybe they didn't get on the airplane. But then they find their baggage — and later, in ET302, it took over eight months before DNA would identify small pieces of remains. It's very, very difficult. And it also raises a lot of ethical issues, because you're dealing — a retainer is a contract, a relationship with people who are in very, very bad situations. So how you treat them, what information you give them about the law, their options, et cetera, is all very, very important. We take it very seriously at Kreindler & Kreindler.

RebuttalPR is a strategic communications firm that works exclusively with the plaintiffs bar to market their firms and win high-stakes litigation. For more than 15 years, the nation's leading plaintiff law firms have turned to RebuttalPR to create winning communications campaigns, ranging from billion-dollar mass torts and class actions to positioning attorneys in their markets to grow their businesses and make a bigger impact. What sets RebuttalPR apart is the unique skill set of our team, which combines legal knowledge with public relations expertise. Our team's ability to understand the facts and law of a case, as well as the media landscape, means we can develop compelling, narrative-driven campaigns that resonate with key stakeholders and support your firm and legal strategy. Visit our website, rebuttalpr.com, to learn more. Now, back to our episode.

Ray: We're joined by Justin Green, partner with the Kreindler firm in New York, one of America's leading aviation attorneys. Justin, I want to talk about Boeing, and I know you're in litigation with them currently over the Ethiopian Air crash. I don't want to go into that case too far, but they are one of, if not the most important company for America's economy — yet all these struggles over the last few years. And what I first want to ask you about is: there have been so many whistleblowers who have come forward and alleged issues inside the company. It just seems to be such an anomaly, where you don't see that happening at other companies. Based on your knowledge and experience litigating against the company, what's your sense of what is happening there and how they can turn around their safety culture?

Justin: You know, I think they lost their way. I think they really lost the trust and the faith of their employees, to the extent that those employees feel like they have to reach out publicly rather than trying to deal with it internally. So you have people working at Boeing committed to quality, committed to safety, and their voices aren't being heard. And you can only push people like that so far before they're going to reach out to a reporter or reach out to a lawyer and try to get change from the outside. I think Boeing has been playing the short ball instead of the long ball. They try to snuff out the fires as they come up rather than solve the bigger problem. And the bigger problem, as you touched on, is the safety culture. They made a choice prioritizing profit. I don't like to sound cliché, but the stock price and the amount of money they were making was what the C-suite was really focused on, when historically Boeing had been one of the greatest engineering companies in history, and the focus had been on the quality of its engineering.

I think they do have the opportunity to come back. I think Congress wants Boeing to come back. I think our clients would love it if Boeing made a real commitment to improving safety. And I think the public expects it. If they don't, they're going to lose out to Airbus. They're going to lose out to other manufacturers in the future. So it's important. A lot of times people think of safety as a cost item. Investments in safety don't necessarily, in the short run, improve the bottom line, but in the long run it's very important to profitability to have safe products and to have the public trust of the aviation community. Because if you're thinking of buying a Boeing aircraft after a door blows out, maybe you might rethink whether you're going to trust Boeing's quality. So quality and safety should be prioritized, and it's important to Boeing's financial health.

Ray: The administration is going to be looking for a new administrator of the FAA who comes in with Boeing being like the number one to ten item on their plate, probably. What advice, if you were given half an hour with the FAA administrator, would you offer?

Justin: I mean, really, I don't have to go too far. There have been long-standing, prioritized lists of how to improve aviation safety generally. Mandating safety management systems for all commercial operations is one. In terms of Boeing and other manufacturers, ending this amended type certificate program, where a manufacturer is allowed to field a new airplane but without requiring the airplane to meet the modern standards of safety because they're doing it as a new model of an older airplane. Basically, it allows them to grandfather in new airplanes without meeting updated standards. And I think that would be important.

I also think it's important that they bring in someone who has a real dedicated commitment to safety. There have been gaps — the administrator is stepping down, having been in there a very short time. He's going to leave a void in leadership at the administration. So it's important for President Trump to bring in someone, and to bring in someone quickly, but it's even more important to bring in someone who is really committed to safety. And someone like Chris Hart, who is the former National Transportation Safety Board chairperson, would be a perfect choice. Bringing in someone from Boeing, or someone who is tainted by some of the safety problems they've had, would be a mistake.

Ray: When you are presented with a new aviation case — so let's say there's an accident, you're contacted by a family member — what are the first things you consider or look at in that case? Do you put your pilot hat on? Your lawyer hat on? Your investigator hat on? What is the experience you bring to bear to analyze the problem?

Justin: You really have to — I mean, first of all, you have to put your human hat on, because you're dealing with someone who either was themselves in a plane crash and might be very badly injured, or who's just lost someone in the plane crash. And second — as much as I enjoy figuring out why airplanes crash, and my whole life has been dedicated to that — it's also: can you bring the lawsuit? Where can you bring the lawsuit? Who might be liable? So the lawyer side is just as important as the aviation side. Some of the best aviation lawyers in the world — Lee Kreindler, who started our firm with his dad, Harry, was not a pilot. He went out and got significant experience in aviation, but he did that as a lawyer, to bone up and learn enough to prosecute the case. So the lawyer part is as important as the aviation part. If I can prove why an airplane crashed but I can't bring a lawsuit in the United States, I can still help the family, but they'll end up having to pursue justice outside the United States, usually with lawyers that we work with on cases like that.

Ray: When I mentioned at the top, you had this unique experience — you were a pilot, now a lawyer representing them. You mentioned the helicopter crash you were in, but you were also in a commercial plane crash yourself, is that right?

Justin: Yeah, I mean, it's maybe a plane crash light. I wish it were a different airline, because when I say it, it dates me. So I was on an Eastern Airlines flight returning to Pensacola, where I was starting flight school, back in the late 80s. And the airplane, in a driving rainstorm, landed front first, and when the main gear hit, it broke in half behind the wing. I was basically one row back behind the wing. It didn't come apart, but as we went down the runway with sparks from the tail dragging on the ground, rain was coming in through the top, which was open to the sky. And luckily, nobody was injured. We had to deplane in the middle of this storm — the people who banged up their knees and needed it ultimately stayed at the aircraft, but the rest of us ended up walking a mile back to the terminal.

And my friend, who was there to pick me up, still didn't know what had happened, and suddenly a bunch of very wet passengers started filtering into the Pensacola terminal. I had to go to medical the next day because I had banged up my knees — the crack was right under the seats in front of me, so the seats came back into my knees. I had bruises, but I wasn't badly injured. And I got called by a lawyer who wanted me to bring a lawsuit, and I didn't, because I was like, I'm going to fly tomorrow in flight school, so I'm not sure what kind of lawsuit I'm going to bring. But I remember him telling me, hey, I can get you enough money for a new car. At the moment, though, my priority was getting my wings. But I think about that experience because I imagine what my clients, who aren't as lucky as I am, go through when they actually get injured or lose loved ones. So, you know, they always say in aviation that crashes come in threes. So I've had two. I've got to be careful.

Ray: Justin, you've been really generous with your time here. I want to end this conversation with a question about the future of you at Kreindler — hopefully you have many decades left, but I know you spend a lot of time mentoring other lawyers. What advice do you offer lawyers at your firm, or lawyers elsewhere, who want to be in aviation law and represent victims of these crashes?

Justin: We're very, very lucky because we have some really terrific young partners at the firm. And honestly, I'm at a point in my career where I spend as much time mentoring others and giving other people opportunities, and I enjoy it very much. But ultimately, I'll tell you exactly what I tell young lawyers who want to work at the firm and who are working at the firm: you have to be responsible for your own career. At our firm, we generally won't hire someone right out of law school; we're looking for someone who has probably clerked or done something like that, because it's a place where we can't really hold your hand. The work is pretty intense. But I think that ultimately young people have to be responsible for their careers, they have to be responsible for making the connections, they have to be responsible for the quality of their work, and then they have to seek out the opportunities. We're very fortunate to have young lawyers who do all of the above. And so I'm very proud to be one of the older partners at the firm. Really, the staff at the firm and the younger lawyers inspire me and keep me coming to work.

Ray: Thank you, Justin, again, for joining the podcast. I'm also going to put in a plug: if folks are on Amazon Prime, you should watch Flight Risk, which features Justin. I've teased him about it — there's a scene where they have tape of him running, and I know, Justin, you are a runner, but it was a very dramatic scene, and I always laugh when I see it. It's a great documentary about Justin's advocacy. But anyway, Justin, thank you again for joining us today.

Justin: Anytime. Thanks, Ray.

Thanks for listening to this episode of Raising the Bar with RebuttalPR. Don't forget to subscribe and follow to join us next time. See you then.