TWA Lawsuit

[TWA Dude]

when does the damage trial start?

Not for a while. The judge needs to first rule on ALPA's motion to set aside the verdict then set the schedule for discovery. At least six months-to a year from now.

 

[stlflyguy]

So is there any section of the court case transcript now published that is a "smoking gun" type read where the DFR failure is really clear in the testimony? I plan on starting to read it from the beginning tonight, but am not beyond jumping ahead to the interesting parts

The Plaintiffs' attorney starts closing arguments at page 3237. Other fun tidbits are on pages 1944-1954 (the $900 dinner for four), pages 3280-3283.. "I don't remember."

 

[ualdriver]

The Plaintiffs' attorney starts closing arguments at page 3237. Other fun tidbits are on pages 1944-1954 (the $900 dinner for four), pages 3280-3283.. "I don't remember."

OK thanks. I think I'm up to page 400 or so now. Case didn't come across very well on the cross examination by ALPA's lawyer! Also, I would have thought they would have transcribed the depositions that the jury heard, but nothing that I could find.

 

[taysha]

Alpa sold the Twa pilots down the river hoping AA pilots would choose ALPA once single carrier status was made.

 

[TWA Dude]

Interesting development:

Archer & Greiner Hit With Sanction Over Charge That Adversaries Lied

Charles Toutant
New Jersey Law Journal
September 26, 2011

A federal judge has sanctioned Archer & Greiner $5,000 over an assertion by one of its attorneys that opposing counsel proffered false testimony in a dispute between ex-Trans World Airlines pilots and their union.

District Judge Joseph Irenas in Newark on Sept. 22 granted a motion by opposing counsel to punish the Haddonfield firm for Rule 11 violations in Brady v. Air Line Pilots Association, 02-cv-2917.

Archer, which represents the union defendant, had asked the court to revoke pro hac vice admission for two plaintiffs' lawyers in the case, Joe Jacobson and Allen Press of Green Jacobson in St. Louis, based on their alleged orchestration of false testimony.

Although the perjury allegation was not before the court, Irenas denied Archer's revocation motion.

He also ordered Archer to pay $2,500 each to Jacobson and Press out of its own coffers, rather than pass the cost on to its client.

And Irenas ordered the firm to pay its adversaries' legal fees for preparation of the sanctions motion and defense of the revocation motion, and he asked Jacobson and Press to submit affidavits detailing the legal fees and costs they incurred for those tasks.

Archer's motion, signed by attorney Steven Fram on Aug. 10, claimed that Jacobson and Press arranged false testimony by five witnesses about whether a former attorney working for the union, Roland Wilder Jr., attended a particular meeting in 2001 in St. Louis.

On Sept. 1, Jacobson was one of three candidates nominated by a judicial selection committee to fill a vacancy on the Missouri Supreme Court. Gov. Jeremiah Nixon has up to 60 days to make a selection from the three.
The plaintiffs, in a brief to support their Sept. 6 motion for sanctions, called Fram's claim "frivolous on its face," baseless and "as serious an accusation as one can make against a lawyer." They added that "in support of its grave allegations, however, defendant rests simply on its counsel's wild imagination."

In a Sept. 12 filing with the court, their local counsel, Lisa Rodriguez of Trujillo, Rodriguez & Richards in Haddonfield, asked Irenas to rule promptly on Fram's revocation motion, citing Jacobson's judicial nomination and asserting that any unresolved allegation of misconduct may affect whether he is appointed.

But Fram said in a Sept. 20 letter to the court that Jacobson's judicial nomination should not be a factor in when the court makes its decision.
"It would be unfortunate if a ruling by this Court was portrayed as either an endorsement of Mr. Jacobson's candidacy or as opposition to his candidacy," Fram said.

Irenas, in his order granting sanctions and denying revocation of the admission of Jacobson and Press, did not comment on Fram's assertion that plaintiffs' counsel proferred perjured testimony.

The suit was brought on behalf of a class of 2,300 former TWA pilots who claim their former union is liable for their loss of seniority when American Airlines merged with their bankrupt company in 2001.

A federal jury in Newark found on July 13 of this year that the union violated its duty of fair representation of the TWA pilots and that the pilots were injured by the union's actions. A second trial on damages is pending. The pilots' union filed a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and a motion for a new trial on Aug. 10.

Fram claimed that five TWA pilots lied to the court when they testified that Wilder, with Baptiste & Wilder in Washington, D.C., attended a union meeting on April 2, 2001, in St. Louis.

The plaintiffs claimed the union pressured them at the meeting to waive their right to arbitration of disputes over seniority. Wilder, citing his fuzzy memory of that day, has changed his story repeatedly about whether he attended the meeting, according to court documents.

Fram declines to comment on the sanctions. His firm issued a statement from its president, Christopher Gibson: "While we have the highest and utmost regard for the federal judiciary and Judge Irenas, we respectfully disagree with this decision." He added that he could not comment further because the litigation is pending.

Jacobson did not return a call and Press declined to comment.
Rodriguez says her side's decision to resort to sanctions was "unfortunate but necessary."

http://www.law.com/jsp/nj/PubArticleNJ.jsp?id=1202516933739