Addington et al v. US Airline Pilots Association et al
| Don Addington, John Bostic, Mark Burman, Afshin Iranpour, Roger Velez and Steve Wargocki |
| US Airline Pilots Association and US Airways Inc |
| 2:2008cv01633 |
| September 4, 2008 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Labor: Railway Labor Act Office |
| Maricopa |
| Neil V Wake |
| Plaintiff |
| Federal Question |
| 45:151 Railway Labor Act |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
666
ORDER denying 642 Plaintiff's Motion to Transfer Related Case. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 10/18/10.(LSP)
|
|
Filing
663
ORDER that Plas' Rule 60(b) Motion for Relief from the Judgment Dismissing for Lack of Ripeness (Doc. 645) is denied. The Court has also reviewed Plas' Motion to File Supplemental Briefing (Doc. 659) and Defendant USAPA's response. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plas' Motion to File Supplemental Briefing (Doc. 659) is granted. The Clerk shall file Plas' Lodged Supplemental Briefing on the Issue of Strict Compliance with Local Rules (Doc. 660). Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 10/13/10.(KMG)
|
|
Filing
637
ORDER staying pending decision of the appeal of 7/17/09 or until further order of this Court the 600 Motion for Attorney Fees and 620 Motion to Dismiss Case; deferring ruling on 620 Motion to Dismiss 2nd Amended Complaint. FURTHER ORDERED vacating the oral argument on pla's motion for award of attorneys' fees 600 and dfts' motion to dismiss 2nd amended complaint 620 set for 2/24/10. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 2/11/10.(LAD)
|
|
Filing
633
ORDER - IT IS ORDERED setting a status conference concerning the pending motions ( 600 MOTION for Attorney Fees, 620 MOTION to Dismiss Case, MOTION to Dismiss Counts/Claims : 2nd Amd Complt) for 2/9/2010 at 2:00 PM in Courtroom 504, 401 West Washington Street, Phoenix, AZ 85003 before Judge Neil V Wake. Out of state cnsl may appear by telephone. This is a status conference only and not an argument on the merits. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 1/21/10. (SAT)
|
|
Filing
610
ORDER denying 596 Defendant USAPA's Motion to Suspend and Stay Permanent Injunction. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 8/27/09.(DMT, )
|
|
Filing
594
PARTIAL JUDGMENT and PERMANENT INJUNCTION - that all claims in CV08-1728-PHX-NVW are dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. (Doc. # 118.) FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plas' claims a gainst Dft US Airways, Inc., in No. CV 08-1633 PHX-NVW are dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED in No. CV 08-1633-PHX-NVW that the claims of the Plas and the class of all pilots employed by US Airw ays, Inc., in September 2008 who were on the America West seniority list on September 20, 2005, against Dft US Airline Pilots Association for refund of payments of union dues and fees are dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon whi ch relief can be granted. (Doc. # 287.) FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED in No. CV 08-1633-PHX-NVW in favor of the Plas and the class of all pilots employed by US Airways, Inc., in September 2008 who were on the America West seniority list on S eptember 20, 2005, that Dft US Airline Pilots Association and its officers, committees, representatives, agents, and all persons in active concert and participation with them are permanently enjoined A. Immediately, and in good faith, make all reason able efforts to negotiate and implement a single collective bargaining agreement with US Airways that will implement the Nicolau Award seniority proposal unmodified, according to its terms; B. Make all reasonable efforts to support and defend the sen iority rights provided by or arising from the Nicolau Award in negotiations with US Airways; and C. Not negotiate for separate collective bargaining agreements for the separate pilot groups, but rather negotiate for a single collective bargaining agr eement for both pilot groups that incorporates the Nicolau Award. This injunction does not restrain USAPA from pursuing its rights under Section 6 of the Railway Labor Act, consistent with the previous sentence. The Court retains jurisdiction to enfo rce, modify, or dissolve the permanent injunction portion of this order. The Court retains jurisdiction to adjudicate the named Plas' unadjudicated claims for damages and any claims for attorney fees. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 7/17/09. (KMG, )
|
|
Filing
511
ORDER: Trial re damages is set for 8/11/2009 at 09:00 AM before Judge Neil V Wake. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 6/4/09. (SJF)
|
|
Filing
506
ORDER issued regarding expert disclosures re damages phase of case: ORDERED that both parties shall supplement their Rule 26 disclosures to address witnesses, exhibits, documents, and potential areas of expert testimony by June 15. Plaintiffs shall d isclose the identity of, qualifications of, and report by, any expert witness not later than July 1. Defendant shall disclose the identity of, qualifications of, and report by any expert witness not later than July 15. Plaintiffs shall disclose the identity of, qualifications of, and report by, any rebuttal expert witness not later than July 22. See text of attached order for full details. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 6/1/09. (SJF)
|
|
Filing
473
ORDER denying 469 Motion for Leave to Conduct Discovery as unnecessary. FURTHER ORDERED that counsel on both sides confer forthwith and submit to the Court a joint proposed discovery plan relating to the damages phase of the case on or before May 26, 2009. If counsel are unable to agree on a joint proposed discovery plan, counsel shall submit separate proposals on or before May 26, 2009. See text of attached order for full details. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 5/19/09.(SJF)
|
|
Filing
288
ORDER denying Defendant USAPA's 260 Motion for Stay Pending Appeal. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 3/25/09.(REW, )
|
|
Filing
284
ORDER, re 274 MOTION for Protective Order; the parties shall confer regarding the scope of class-member discovery and the procedures by which Plaintiffs will make appropriate class-members available for interview by USAPA's counsel and also re garding any appropriate disclosure of prior communications between USAPA's counsel and class members regarding the subject of the representation. The parties shall inform the Court of the status of this dispute by 4:00pm on 3/26/09. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 3/24/09. (REW, )
|
|
Filing
266
AMENDED ORDER that Dft's 231 Motion for Reconsideration of Order Setting Trial Date is denied. (AMENDED to correct page 4 to reflect that Dft's Motion is denied). Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 03/19/09. (ESL)
|
|
Filing
253
ORDER denying 215 Defendant USAPA's Request for Leave to File Summary Judgment Motions; denying as moot 218 Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File a Dispositive Motion; Defendants may file a Rule 12(c) motion concerning the availability of union fees recovery or suspension by 3/20/09. A Response may be filed by 4/3/09, and a reply by 4/10/09. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 3/13/09.(LSP)
|
|
Filing
250
ORDER denying 231 Motion for Reconsideration of Order Setting Trial Date. See text of attached order for details. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 3/11/09.(SJF)
|
|
Filing
248
ORDER granting 120 Motion to Certify Class. See text of attached order for details. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 3/10/09.(SJF)
|
|
Filing
223
ORDER: The parties shall telephone chambers and schedule an immediate telephone conference to discuss any objections to vacating the Courts February 23, 2009 order (doc. # 210). This conference will also address the parties Notice of Discovery Dispute filed today (doc. # 222). See text of attached order for full details. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 3/3/09. (SJF)
|
|
Filing
220
ORDER denying Defendant USAPA's 217 Motion to Strike Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of Their Motion for Class Certification. See text of attached order for details. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 3/2/09.(SJF)
|
|
Filing
210
ORDER re 120 MOTION to Certify Class - Counsel for Plaintiffs and USAPA shall personally meet and confer regarding the class certification motion forthwith. The parties jointly shall prepare a Proposed Final Pretrial Order respecting certificati on and shall lodge it with the Court no later than 4:00 p.m. on Wednesday, March 4. The Court will determine after reviewing the Proposed Final Pretrial Order whether an evidentiary hearing is required and what its scope should be. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 2/20/09. (see order for full details) (DMT, )
|
|
Filing
202
ORDER that the Dfts' Request for a Jury Trial (docs # 88 , 159 ) is granted. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 02/17/09. (ESL)
|
|
Filing
185
ORDER denying 106 Motion to Compel; denying as moot 111 Motion to Strike. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 2/11/09.(DMT, )
|
|
Filing
118
ORDER that dfts' motion to dismiss (doc #16 in CV-08-1728-PHX-NVW) is denied as to Rules 12(b)(1), (2), (3) and (7) and granted as to Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, the alleged state law claims being preempted. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 12/24/2008. (LAD)
|
|
Filing
84
ORDER granting 30 Motion to Dismiss Case for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by Defendant US Airways. Ordered denying 35 Motion to Dismiss Case for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by US Airline Pilot's Association. Ordered denying Plaintiff's 12 Motion for Preliminary Injunction, for lack of jurisdiction. See text of attached order for full details. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 11/20/08.(SJF)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
