InclusiveScope
Member
- Sep 1, 2002
- 55
- 0
LITIGATION UPDATE
January 20, 2006
ALPA Asks Plaintiffs to Withdraw Lawsuits
At a routine December administrative meeting, ALPA asked that plaintiffs withdraw (not settle) their litigations, and in the alternative, that the Court suspend the ASA & Comair litigations for up to twelve months. Among ALPA's attempts at justification for that position was that it was "too busy" to respond to the legal action.
Plaintiff’s counsel responded that ALPA's recent actions at Delta only affirm the need for legal action. As for ALPA's request that the Court suspend the litigation, the Court declined and instead ordered that the depositions be completed by the end of February. By its actions, ALPA again shows the litigation has merit. Presumably the union wouldn't seek the premature termination of the litigation if in fact its actions were proper.
Our message to ALPA is simple. If the union desires an end to the litigation, then it must demonstrate a willingness to reform its conduct. But as long as ALPA remains unwilling to enact reforms, then we will continue to aggressively prosecute the litigations until a just resolution is obtained.
Related Link: http://www.rjdefense.com/2006/ford2woerth120805.pdf
ALPA Fails to Comply with Court's Scheduling Order
On December 1st, the Court ordered that the depositions be completed no later than February 28th. However, notwithstanding the fact that a full two-thirds of the allotted time has elapsed, ALPA has yet to produce a single deponent (witness.) At this point, ALPA has failed to produce witnesses for eight depositions that were properly noticed by the plaintiffs.
As with ALPA's aforementioned request for a suspension or withdrawal of the suits, its inability to comply with the Court's scheduling order suggests that it is very concerned with what may be revealed in the upcoming depositions.
As a result of ALPA's recalcitrance, plaintiffs have been forced to notify the Court of the status (or non-status) of depositions. We anticipate that ALPA will soon be summoned by the Court to explain its non-compliance.
Related Links: http://www.rjdefense.com/2006/counsel2court_011106.pdf http://www.rjdefense.com/2006/docket_011106.pdf
ALPA Still Owes Thousands of Documents
Concurrent with the issue of ALPA's inability to produce its officials for depositions, formal notice has been served upon ALPA regarding the incompleteness of its document production. Specifically, the plaintiffs have contended that ALPA has apparently withheld or failed to produce entire broad categories of documents relevant to proving its conduct.
A small sampling of the missing important items includes:
The full text of ALPA's proposals to Delta management.
The full text of ALPA's instructions to its negotiators.
The full record of ALPA's similar attempts to restrict the small jet at USAirways and Northwest.
Related Link: http://www.rjdefense.com/2006/deficiencies_11-15-06.pdf
What's in a Document and What Have We Found?
What's in a document? A lot. Legal cases have literally been won and lost simply because of a hand-written note scribbled in a margin or another seemingly innocuous fact found buried in the proverbial "haystack." The legal standard for what we may request from ALPA is quite broad. Parties may request any document that reasonably may contain relevant information, or lead to relevant information.
Unfortunately, legal issues restrict our ability to disclose much of what we have learned. First, many of the documents are covered by a court-sanctioned confidentiality agreement. Second, publicly revealing what we've found puts the plaintiffs at a decided disadvantage. We would not want our interest in keeping the pilot group well informed (which remains an important concern) to undermine the plaintiffs’ strategic efforts, such as to put us in a position in which we snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
However, with Counsel's consent, here's what we can say:
After reviewing thousands of pages of documentation, plaintiffs and counsel continue to have the utmost confidence in this lawsuit.
Nothing in ALPA's document production undermines the plaintiffs’ confidence in the core claims that ALPA has promulgated a gross conflict of interest and has systematically and willfully violated its duties to the ASA and Comair pilots.
Other data points include references to "mainline" 70-seat rates, threats made against the Comair pilots, and of course, frequent attacks levied against the RJDC and its leaders.
Related Link: http://www.rjdefense.com/2004/discovery_list_by_subject.pdf
Legal Note: Delta Filed Bankruptcy, Not ALPA
Since the filing of the Delta bankruptcy, many have inquired whether or not Delta's filing will affect the ongoing litigation against ALPA. In a nutshell, the answer is that while any corporate event of that magnitude is material, it's not dispositive (having the potential for determining the outcome of the case.)
The key point is that it's Delta, not ALPA, who has filed for bankruptcy. Even then, bankruptcy filings do not terminate legal proceedings. More importantly, as ALPA has been warned, history shows that it's during times of "crisis" that a union is more likely to violate its duty to its members. Therefore during the wave of airline bankruptcies, ALPA must exercise more oversight, not less.
Related Link: http://www.deltadocket.com/
January 20, 2006
ALPA Asks Plaintiffs to Withdraw Lawsuits
At a routine December administrative meeting, ALPA asked that plaintiffs withdraw (not settle) their litigations, and in the alternative, that the Court suspend the ASA & Comair litigations for up to twelve months. Among ALPA's attempts at justification for that position was that it was "too busy" to respond to the legal action.
Plaintiff’s counsel responded that ALPA's recent actions at Delta only affirm the need for legal action. As for ALPA's request that the Court suspend the litigation, the Court declined and instead ordered that the depositions be completed by the end of February. By its actions, ALPA again shows the litigation has merit. Presumably the union wouldn't seek the premature termination of the litigation if in fact its actions were proper.
Our message to ALPA is simple. If the union desires an end to the litigation, then it must demonstrate a willingness to reform its conduct. But as long as ALPA remains unwilling to enact reforms, then we will continue to aggressively prosecute the litigations until a just resolution is obtained.
Related Link: http://www.rjdefense.com/2006/ford2woerth120805.pdf
ALPA Fails to Comply with Court's Scheduling Order
On December 1st, the Court ordered that the depositions be completed no later than February 28th. However, notwithstanding the fact that a full two-thirds of the allotted time has elapsed, ALPA has yet to produce a single deponent (witness.) At this point, ALPA has failed to produce witnesses for eight depositions that were properly noticed by the plaintiffs.
As with ALPA's aforementioned request for a suspension or withdrawal of the suits, its inability to comply with the Court's scheduling order suggests that it is very concerned with what may be revealed in the upcoming depositions.
As a result of ALPA's recalcitrance, plaintiffs have been forced to notify the Court of the status (or non-status) of depositions. We anticipate that ALPA will soon be summoned by the Court to explain its non-compliance.
Related Links: http://www.rjdefense.com/2006/counsel2court_011106.pdf http://www.rjdefense.com/2006/docket_011106.pdf
ALPA Still Owes Thousands of Documents
Concurrent with the issue of ALPA's inability to produce its officials for depositions, formal notice has been served upon ALPA regarding the incompleteness of its document production. Specifically, the plaintiffs have contended that ALPA has apparently withheld or failed to produce entire broad categories of documents relevant to proving its conduct.
A small sampling of the missing important items includes:
The full text of ALPA's proposals to Delta management.
The full text of ALPA's instructions to its negotiators.
The full record of ALPA's similar attempts to restrict the small jet at USAirways and Northwest.
Related Link: http://www.rjdefense.com/2006/deficiencies_11-15-06.pdf
What's in a Document and What Have We Found?
What's in a document? A lot. Legal cases have literally been won and lost simply because of a hand-written note scribbled in a margin or another seemingly innocuous fact found buried in the proverbial "haystack." The legal standard for what we may request from ALPA is quite broad. Parties may request any document that reasonably may contain relevant information, or lead to relevant information.
Unfortunately, legal issues restrict our ability to disclose much of what we have learned. First, many of the documents are covered by a court-sanctioned confidentiality agreement. Second, publicly revealing what we've found puts the plaintiffs at a decided disadvantage. We would not want our interest in keeping the pilot group well informed (which remains an important concern) to undermine the plaintiffs’ strategic efforts, such as to put us in a position in which we snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
However, with Counsel's consent, here's what we can say:
After reviewing thousands of pages of documentation, plaintiffs and counsel continue to have the utmost confidence in this lawsuit.
Nothing in ALPA's document production undermines the plaintiffs’ confidence in the core claims that ALPA has promulgated a gross conflict of interest and has systematically and willfully violated its duties to the ASA and Comair pilots.
Other data points include references to "mainline" 70-seat rates, threats made against the Comair pilots, and of course, frequent attacks levied against the RJDC and its leaders.
Related Link: http://www.rjdefense.com/2004/discovery_list_by_subject.pdf
Legal Note: Delta Filed Bankruptcy, Not ALPA
Since the filing of the Delta bankruptcy, many have inquired whether or not Delta's filing will affect the ongoing litigation against ALPA. In a nutshell, the answer is that while any corporate event of that magnitude is material, it's not dispositive (having the potential for determining the outcome of the case.)
The key point is that it's Delta, not ALPA, who has filed for bankruptcy. Even then, bankruptcy filings do not terminate legal proceedings. More importantly, as ALPA has been warned, history shows that it's during times of "crisis" that a union is more likely to violate its duty to its members. Therefore during the wave of airline bankruptcies, ALPA must exercise more oversight, not less.
Related Link: http://www.deltadocket.com/
