The NTSB Investigation in Aviation Litigation: What Its Findings Can—And Cannot—Prove

When a catastrophic aviation accident occurs, one of the first questions asked is what caused the crash. In the United States, the responsibility of figuring out the cause falls to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), whose investigations produce detailed factual reports examining the aircraft, its operation, the surrounding environment, and the events leading to the accident.

Many assume that once the NTSB issues the final report, the legal questions were answered. That is not the case. The Board’s investigation is the beginning, not the end, of civil litigation. Although the factual findings may prove beneficial in court, they are only a foundation to seeking damages.

The NTSB Serves a Different Purpose Than Civil Litigation

The NTSB’s mission is to improve transportation safety by investigating accidents and the probable cause. Unlike a civil court, however, the Board does not determine legal liability or award damages. Rather, the investigations are used to identify safety deficiencies, recommendations, and reduce the likelihood of similar accidents in the future.

Civil litigation serves a different purpose. Courts are not tasked with improving aviation safety. Instead they are asked to determine whether a defendant owed a legal duty, whether that duty was breached, and whether that breach caused injuries. Although both proceedings examine the same accident, the answer may be fundamentally different. As a result, an NTSB investigation and lawsuits reach differing conclusions even when the processes are similar.

What Does the NTSB Actually Investigate?

NTSB investigations are usually extensive, particularly when they follow accidents involving substantial aircraft damage or fatalities. Depending on the situation surrounding the aviation accident, the investigators may examine beyond the accident scene. They will analyze flight data and cockpit voice recordings, inspect maintenance records, evaluate weather conditions, and interview witnesses, including aircraft manufacturers and operators.

Often, the resulting investigative record contains thousands of pages of factual material that document what investigators observed and the analyses performed. As such, the investigative report may become a pivotal piece of evidence in litigation, as it can be used to discuss how the accident, injuries, and fatalities occurred.

Facts and Probable Cause Are Treated Differently

Probable cause separates the NTSB’s factual findings from litigation. Under 49 U.S.C. § 1154(b), the Board’s reports may not be admitted into evidence or used in a civil action to prove liability for matters mentioned in the report. Courts have generally interpreted this limitation to preclude the admission of the NTSB’s probable cause conclusions while permitting the underlying factual information developed during the investigation to be considered under appropriate circumstances.

The Board has a unique statutory role. Determining the probable cause of an accident for transportation safety purposes is not the same as determining whether a defendant is legally liable under applicable negligence or products liability principles.

What Portions of an NTSB Investigation May Be Used?

Although the Board’s ultimate conclusions are subject to statutory limitations under 49 U.S.C. § 1154(b), the underlying investigation may be highly significant during civil litigation.

Photographs documenting the accident scene, measurements taken during the investigation, maintenance records, component examinations, laboratory testing, meteorological data, and other factual materials may be relevant to some—if not all—of the issues brought up in the case. Those materials provide a framework for which each party can develop theories about negligence, maintenance failures, crashworthiness, and other disputed issues.

In short, even though the Board’s ultimate conclusion cannot be used in court, other information present in the investigation may be used to answer significant legal questions.

Can an NTSB Investigation Be Challenged in Court?

Yes. NTSB investigations may be widely respected fro their technical rigor, but the factual findings nor the investigative analysis are beyond dispute. The Board’s role is to investigate transportation accidents for the purpose of improving public safety, not to adjudicate legal liability between private parties. Therefore, litigants remain free to challenge factual assumptions, technical analyses, and investigative interpretations through the ordinary processes of civil discovery and expert testimony.

For example, parties may dispute whether physical evidence was interpreted correctly, whether all plausible causes were considered, and whether subsequent testing or engineering analysis may have supported a different conclusion. In complex cases, additional inspections, computer modeling, and expert evaluation may produce opinions that differ from those reached by the NTSB.

Ultimately, courts do not require parties to adopt the NTSB’s investigative conclusions simply because they appear in an official report. Instead, each side remains responsible for proving its own claims and defenses under the applicable standards of civil litigation. In that respect, the Board’s investigation is a starting point, not a conclusion.

Why Independent Experts Remain Essential

The existence of an NTSB investigation does not eliminate other evidence nor the need for expert testimony during civil litigation. There are questions presented to the experts that will differ from those considered and investigated by the Board.

An engineering expert may evaluate whether an aircraft component contained a manufacturing or design defect. A maintenance expert may assess whether inspection procedures satisfied the applicable standard of care. Human factors specialists may analyze operational decisions, while medical experts may evaluate the nature and extent of the injuries sustained by the occupants and crew.

Federal Rule of Evidence 703 further recognizes that experts may base their opinions on facts or data reasonably relied upon by experts in the field, even when portions of those underlying materials are not themselves admitted into evidence. As a result, experts may consider factual information developed during an NTSB investigation while independently applying the legal standards governing the civil case before the court.

Conclusion

An NTSB investigation often provides the factual foundation upon which aviation litigation is built, but it does not determine civil liability. While federal law generally limits the use of the Board’s probable cause conclusions in court, the underlying factual investigation frequently remains central to evaluating negligence, products liability, crashworthiness, and other issues arising from an aviation accident. Understanding the distinction between those roles is essential to appreciating what an NTSB investigation can—and cannot—prove in civil litigation.

Raynes & Lawn represents individuals and families in complex aviation litigation involving aircraft accidents, catastrophic injuries, wrongful death, and product liability claims. These cases often require careful analysis of governmental investigations alongside independent legal and technical evaluations to determine whether the evidence supports civil liability under the applicable law.