IN RE: Air Crash Disaster Near Natchtitoches Parish, Louisiana, on September 20, 1973

dt Case MDL No. 193 Document2 Filed 05/01/15 Page	1 of 10
JUD; /
MULTI AL TANEL onFo GA Tion
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL PANEL =
® ON ER 1 1975MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION i. J
CLERK 3 O HwangIN RE AIR CRASH DISASTER NEAR ) UE THE pay,
NATCHITOCHES PARISH, LOUISIANA, ) DOCKET NO. 193
ON SEPTEMBER 20, 1973 )
OPINION AND ORDER
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
PER CURIAM
On September 20, 1973, an airplane owned and operated by
Bromley Corporation crashed into a tree on takeoff from the
Natchitoches, Louisiana, Municipal Airport. Several people
C perished as a result of the crash. Three actions arising from the	——
incident are currently pending in two different districts,
two in the Western District of Louisiana and one in the
1/
Northern District of Texas.
The Texas action and one of the Louisiana actions were filed
by relatives or personal representatives of various decedents
* Although Judges Wisdom, Weinfeld, Becker and Lord were
unable to attend the Panel hearing, they have, with
the consent of all parties, participated in this
decision.
1/ There was formerly another action arising from this crash
pending in the Northern District of Illinois. That action
was dismissed by the Illinois court shortly after the
Panel hearing.

- - Case MDL No. 193 Document2 Filed 05/01/15 Page	2 of 10
- 2 -
® against Bromley and Mustang Aviation, Inc. The two complaints
are substantially identical, containing allegations that Variety
Theater International, Inc. and defendant Mustang entered into
a contract under which the latter was obligated to provide one
of its airplanes and a pilot to safely transport the decedents
to various locations and that after the contract was executed,
and without Variety's knowledge or permission, defendant Mustang
agreed with defendant Bromley to have defendant Bromley carry cut
the contract. It is further alleged that the two defendants have
a parent-subsidiary relationship and are jointly and severally
liable for the negligent operation of the aircraft.
The other Louisiana action was instituted by relatives or
® personal representatives of various decedents against the City
he of Natchitoches, which owns and maintains the airport where the
accident occurred, and Clothilde Prudhomme Hughes, who owns
property adjoining the airport. Plaintiffs allege that these
defendants were negligent in failing to cut down, mark, or
otherwise advise pilots of certain trees that were situated near
the end of the runway and into which the ill-fated aircraft crashed.
Defendant Mustang has moved the Panel for an order transfer-
ring the Louisiana actions to the Northern District of Texas
for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to
28 U.S.C. §1407 with the action pending there. Only defendant
Natchitoches opposes transfer of its action. We find insufficient
basis for transfer under Section 1407 and, accordingly, deny
[] the motion.

. , Case MDL No. 193 Document2 Filed 05/01/15 Page	3 of 10
-— 3 -—
® Movant contends that these actions involve many common
questions of fact and that Section 1407 treatment will provide
the most efficient and convenient method of handling them.
We recognize that two of the actions involve common factual
issues, but we are not persuaded that the overall convenience
of the parties and witnesses and the just and efficient conduct
of this particular litigation will be enhanced by a Section 1407
transfer.
Initially, we observe that the Louisiana action involving
defendants Natchitoches and Hughes is only peripherally related
to the other two actions and raises questions of fact that are
substantially different from those actions. The Natchitoches
® action focuses on the alleged negligence of defendants Natchi-
= toches and Hughes in failing to cut down or mark the trees near
the end of the runway, whereas the other two actions involve
the alleged intercorporate relationship of defendants Mustang
and Bromley and their alleged knowledge of the physical
mental condition of the pilot. Consequently, nothing
can be gained by including the Natchitoches action in coordinated
or consolidated pretrial proceedings with the rest of the litigation.
Since this leaves only two actions sharing common questions
of fact, we find it difficult to justify transfer. See In re
Air Crash Disaster at Anchorage, Alaska, on November 27, 1970,
342 F. Supp. 755, 756 (J.P.M.L. 1972). Moreover, because the
defendants are the same in these two actions and the plaintiffs
@ have identical interests in processing the issue of liability,

- * Case MDL No. 193 Document2 Filed 05/01/15 Page	4 of 10
- 4 -
® any possibility of duplicative discovery can easily be avoided
through cooperative efforts among the parties. For example,
plaintiffs could file notices for a particular deposition in
both the Louisiana and Texas district courts, thereby making
the deposition applicable in each jurisdiction. The parties
could also seek a stipulation that all discovery may be used
in all actions. Thus, we believe that suitable alternatives
to a Section 1407 transfer are available to the parties in
this litigation.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion pursuant to 28
U.S.C. §1407 to transfer the actions listed on the attached
Schedule A be, and the same hereby is, DENIED.
®
®

«om Case MDL No. 193 Document 2 Filed 05/01/15 Page 5 of 10
® SCHEDULE A DOCKET NO. 193WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
bonna M. Merritt, etc. v. The Bromley Civil Action
Corp. d/b/a Roberts Airways, et al. No. 74-858
Ingrid Croce, etc. v. City of Natchi- Civil Action
toches, et al. No. 74-884
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Ingrid Croce, et al. v. The Bromley Civil Action
Corp., et al. No. 3-74-843-B

~ Case MDL No. 193 Document 2 Filed 05/01/15 Page 6 of 10
1 Hilo, 7)
HILT Fd:ML my	STIRRSUREAT	HE ao!
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL PANEL : fr re
® or Hap)MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION rs
Phra,
IN RE AIR CRASH DISASTER NEAR 0) CLERK br 3310mm
NATCHITOCHES PARISH, LOUISIANA, ) DOCKET NO. 193 TAHEL
ON SEPTEMBER 20, 1973 )
OPINION AND ORDER
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
PER CURIAM
On September 20, 1973, an airplane owned and operated by
Bromley Corporation crashed into a tree on takeoff from the
Natchitoches, Louisiana, Municipal Airport. Several people
® perished as a result of the crash. Three actions arising from the
incident are currently pending in two different districts,
two in the Western District of Louisiana and one in the
1/
Northern District of Texas.
The Texas action and one of the Louisiana actions were filed
by relatives or personal representatives of various decedents
* Although Judges Wisdom, Weinfeld, Becker and Lord were
unable to attend the Panel hearing, they have, with
the consent of all parties, participated in this
decision.
L/ There was formerly another action arising from this crash
pending in the Northern District of Illinois. That action
was dismissed by the Illinois court shortly after the
Panel hearing.

- . Case MDL No. 193 Document2 Filed 05/01/15 Page	7 of 10
- 2 -
® against Bromley and Mustang Aviation, Inc. The two complaints
are substantially identical, containing allegations that Variety
Theater International, Inc. and defendant Mustang entered into
a contract under which the latter was obligated to provide one
of its airplanes and a pilot to safely transport the decedents
to various locations and that after the contract was executed,
and without Variety's knowledge or permission, defendant Mustang
agreed with defendant Bromley to have defendant Bromley carry out
the contract. It is further alleged that the two defendants have
a parent-subsidiary relationship and are jointly and severally
liable for the negligent operation of the aircraft.
The other Louisiana action was instituted by relatives or
® personal representatives of various decedents against the City
of Natchitoches, which owns and maintains the airport where the
accident occurred, and Clothilde Prudhomme Hughes, who owns
property adjoining the airport. Plaintiffs allege that these
defendants were negligent in failing to cut down, mark, or
otherwise advise pilots of certain trees that were situated near
the end of the runway and into which the ill-fated aircraft crashed.
Defendant Mustang has moved the Panel for an order transfer-
ring the Louisiana actions to the Northern District of Texas
for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to
28 U.S.C. §1407 with the action pending there. Only defendant
Natchitoches opposes transfer of its action. We find insufficient
basis for transfer under Section 1407 and, accordingly, deny
@ the motion.

. . Case MDL No. 193 Document2 Filed 05/01/15 Page	8 of 10
-— 3 -—
® Movant contends that these actions involve many common
questions of fact and that Section 1407 treatment will provide
the most efficient and convenient method of handling them.
We recognize that two of the actions involve common factual
issues, but we are not persuaded that the overall convenience
of the parties and witnesses and the just and efficient conduct
of this particular litigation will be enhanced by a Section 1407
transfer.
Initially, we observe that the Louisiana action involving
defendants Natchitoches and Hughes is only peripherally related
to the other two actions and raises questions of fact that are
substantially different from those actions. The Natchitoches
[ action focuses on the alleged negligence of defendants Natchi-
toches and Hughes in failing to cut down or mark the trees near
the end of the runway, whereas the other two actions involve
the alleged intercorporate relationship of defendants Mustang
and Bromley and their alleged knowledge of the physical
mental condition of the pilot. Consequently, nothing
can be gained by including the Natchitoches action in coordinated
or consolidated pretrial proceedings with the rest of the litigation.
Since this leaves only two actions sharing common questions
of fact, we find it difficult to justify transfer. See In re
Air Crash Disaster at Anchorage, Alaska, on November 27, 1970,
342 F. Supp. 755, 756 (J.P.M.L. 1972). Moreover, because the
defendants are the same in these two actions and the plaintiffs
@ have identical interests in processing the issue of liability,

- = Case MDL No. 193 Document2 Filed 05/01/15 Page	9 of 10
- 4 -
® any possibility of duplicative discovery can easily be avoided
through cooperative efforts among the parties. For example,
plaintiffs could file notices for a particular deposition in
both the Louisiana and Texas district courts, thereby making
the deposition applicable in each jurisdiction. The parties
could also seek a stipulation that all discovery may be used
in all actions. Thus, we believe that suitable alternatives
to a Section 1407 transfer are available to the parties in
this litigation.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion pursuant to 28
U.S.C. §1407 to transfer the actions listed on the attached
Schedule A be, and the same hereby is, DENIED.
®
@

- . Case MDL No. 193 Document 2 Filed 05/01/15 Page 10 of 10
® SCHEDULE A DOCKET NO. 193WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
Donna M. Merritt, etc. v. The Bromley Civil Action
Corp. d/b/a Roberts Airways, et al. No. 74-858
Ingrid Croce, etc. v. City of Natchi- Civil Action
toches, et al. No. 74-884
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Ingrid Croce, et al. v. The Bromley Civil Action
Corp., et al. No. 3-74-843-B