In Re Duarte, California Air Crash Disaster

354 F. Supp. 278
CourtUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
DecidedFebruary 1, 1973
Docket106
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 354 F. Supp. 278 (In Re Duarte, California Air Crash Disaster) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Duarte, California Air Crash Disaster, 354 F. Supp. 278 (jpml 1973).

Opinion

354 F.Supp. 278 (1973)

In re DUARTE, CALIFORNIA AIR CRASH DISASTER ON JUNE 6, 1971.
James S. Phillips, etc. v. Hughes Air Corp., D.C., Civil Action No. 118-72

No. 106.

Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.

February 1, 1973.

Before ALFRED P. MURRAH,[*] Chairman, and JOHN MINOR WISDOM, EDWARD WEINFELD, EDWIN A. ROBSON, WILLIAM H. BECKER, JOSEPH S. LORD, III, and STANLEY A. WEIGEL, Judges of the Panel.

*279 OPINION AND ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On June 6, 1971, a Marine Corps aircraft collided in mid-air with a Hughes Air West passenger plane and in July 1972 the Panel transferred more than 30 actions arising from that collision to the Central District of California for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. In re Duarte, California, Air Disaster Litigation, 346 F.Supp. 529 (Jud. Pan.Mult.Lit.1972). The Phillips action, brought by the parents of the Marine Corps pilot killed in the collision, was subsequently filed in the District of Columbia and was the subject of a conditional transfer order to the Central District of California, entered by the Clerk of the Panel pursuant to the Panel's Rule 12. 53 F.R.D. 119, 123 (Jud.Pan. Mult.Lit.1971). The sole defendant, Hughes Air, has expressed its opposition to the proposed transfer. On the basis of the briefs and oral argument, we order the Phillips action transferred to the Central District of California.

Hughes has moved to dismiss or to quash process in the Phillips action on the grounds that it was not doing business in the District of Columbia and that service upon it was, therefore, improper. The plaintiffs have moved for a continuance of that motion pending answers to certain interrogatories and Hughes has moved to strike those interrogatories. None of these motions has been argued before the District of Columbia court.

Hughes contends that the action should be left with the transferor court for decision of the motion to dismiss because the transferor court has a greater familiarity with the relevant laws. This argument is unconvincing. As Hughes conceded at oral argument, its motion to dismiss is clearly a pretrial motion which may appropriately be decided by the transferee court and the problem of ascertaining and applying the law of the transferor jurisdiction is frequently faced by transferee judges. See, e. g., In re Puerto Rico Air Disaster Litigation, 340 F.Supp. 492 (D.P.R.1972).

Hughes also argues that the Phillips action is factually different from the cases previously transferred because it arises from the death of the Marine Corps pilot rather than from the deaths of the passengers and crew on the Hughes airplane and raises the legal issues of assumption of risk and contributory negligence. While different legal issues may be raised by the Phillips complaint, we think the factual issues in the case are sufficiently common to warrant transfer for pretrial coordination or consolidation.

It is therefore ordered that the action entitled James S. Phillips, etc. v. Hughes Air Corp., District of Columbia, Civil Action No. 1108-72, be, and the same hereby is, transferred to the Central District of California and, with the permission of that court, assigned to the Honorable Peirson Hall for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, with the other actions pending in that district and assigned to Judge Hall.

NOTES

[*] Although Judge Murrah was not present at the hearing, he has, with the consent of all parties, participated in this decision.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Vincent v. Hughes Air West, Inc.
557 F.2d 759 (Ninth Circuit, 1977)
Jewel Vincent, Claimant-Appellant v. Hughes Air West, Inc., a Corporation, United States of America, Defendant- Howard Brand v. Hughes Air West, Inc., a Corporation, Norene E. Forgy v. Hughes Air West, Inc., a Corporation, Cynthia Kalbfleisch v. Hughes Air Corp., a Corporation, D/B/A Air West, Inc., Etc., United States of America, Daniel Subic and Alice Elder v. Hughes Air West, Inc., a Corporation, and United States of America, Norene E. Forgy v. The United States of America, Howard Brand v. The United States of America, James A. Thomas v. Hughes Air Corporation, Etc., James A. Thomas v. United States of America, Kathryn J. Thomas v. United States of America, James A. Thomas v. Hughes Air Corporation, Etc., Kathryn J. Thomas v. Hughes Air Corporation, Etc., Apolinar Espitia v. Hughes Air West, Inc., Etc., Cheryl Johnson Deveau v. Hughes Air West, Inc., Etc., Guillermo Rangel v. Hughes Air West, Inc., a Corporation, Ana Rosa Rangel v. Hughes Air West, Inc., a Corporation, Daniel Subic and Alice Elder v. United States of America, Cheryl Johnson Deveau v. United States of America, Apolinar Espitia v. United States of America, Guillermo Rangel v. United States of America, Ana Rosa Rangel v. United States of America, Steven Bird v. Hughes Air West, Inc., Leland A. Harward and Phyllis Harward v. United States of America, Margaret M. Reeves v. The United States of America, Steven Bird v. United States of America, Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company v. United States
557 F.2d 759 (Ninth Circuit, 1977)
In Re King Resources Company Securities Litigation
385 F. Supp. 588 (Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, 1974)
Ohio v. Boucher
385 F. Supp. 588 (Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, 1974)
In Re Air Crash Disaster in the Ionian Sea on September 8, 1974
407 F. Supp. 238 (Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
354 F. Supp. 278, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-duarte-california-air-crash-disaster-jpml-1973.