In re Air Crash at Lexington, Ky., Aug. 27, 2007

• Decision Date: 13 April 2007
• Docket Number: Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-339 First Citizens Bank, T. Kono (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-4220),,Civil Action No. 5:07-CV-006 Combs (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-5585).,Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-412 Thomason (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-5078).,Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-413 Frederick (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-5102).,Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-371 Demrow, et al. (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-4371),,Relating To: Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-313 Adams (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-3749),,Civil Action (Master File) No. 5:06-cv-316-KSF.,Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-340 Curry (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-4308),,Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-337 First Citizens Bank, N. Kono (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-4219),,Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-411 Trimble (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-5130).,Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-392 Bizzack (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-4888).,Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-333 C. Washington (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-3940),,Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-327 Hebert (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-3843),
• Citation: 486 F.Supp.2d 640
• Parties: In re AIR CRASH AT LEXINGTON, KENTUCKY, AUGUST 27, 2006.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Kentucky

Page 640

486 F.Supp.2d 640

In re AIR CRASH AT LEXINGTON, KENTUCKY, AUGUST 27, 2006.

Relating To: Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-313 Adams (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-3749),

Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-327 Hebert (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-3843),

Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-333 C. Washington (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-3940),

Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-337 First Citizens Bank, N. Kono (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-4219),

Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-339 First Citizens Bank, T. Kono (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-4220),

Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-340 Curry (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-4308),

Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-371 Demrow, et al. (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-4371),

Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-392 Bizzack (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-4888).

Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-411 Trimble (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-5130).

Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-412 Thomason (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-5078).

Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-413 Frederick (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-5102).

Civil Action No. 5:07-CV-006 Combs (Fayette Cir. Ct. No. 06-CI-5585).

Civil Action (Master File) No. 5:06-cv-316-KSF.

United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Central Division at Lexington.

April 13, 2007.

Louise Malbin Roselle, Waite, Paul M. Demarco, Renee A. Infante, Stanley M. Chesley, Schneider, Bayless & Chesley Co., LPA, Louise Malbin Roselle, Renee A. Infante, Stanley M. Chesley, Louise Malbin Roselle, Waite, Schneider, Bayless & Chesley Co., LPA, Cincinnati, OH, Allen Schulman, Jr., Canton, OH, Bruce A. Lampert, Richard F. Schaden, Schaden Katzman Lampert & McClune, Broomfield, CO, Charles M. Pritchett, Jr., Frost Brown Todd LLC', Larry B. Franklin, Franklin & Hance, P.S.C., Mark K. Gray, Matthew L. White, Gray & White, Edward H. Stopher, Boehl, Stopher & Graves, Howard L. Robinson, Robinson Law Office, Louisville, KY, David I. Katzman, Schaden Katzman Lampert & McClune, Troy, MI, Keith Moorman, Frost Brown Todd LLC, Joe C. Savage, Escum L. Moore, III, Savage, Elliott, Houlihan, Moore, Mullins & Erdmann, LLP, Bobby G. Wombles, Chad R. Wadlington, Wombles & Wadlington, Benjamin L. Kessinger, III, Shelby C. Kinkead, Jr., Kinkead & Stilz, PLLC, Michael J. Cox, Thomas Walcutt Miller, Miller, Griffin & Marks, P.S.C., Debra Ann Doss, William L. Davis, Pamela Yvette Hourigan, Law Office of Yvette. Hourigan, Charles C. Adams, Jr., Thomas K. Herren, Herren & Adams, Douglas L. Hoots, Tyler Griffin Smith, Landrum & Shouse LLP, William R. Garmer, Garmer & O'Brien, LLP, Lexington, KY, David L. Fiol, Elizabeth J. Cabraser, Lexi J. Hazam, Robert L. Lieff, Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, San Francisco, CA, Colin H. Dunn, Kevin P. Durkin, Michael S. Krzak, Robert A. Clifford, Thomas K. Prindable, Clifford Law Offices, P.C., David C. Wise, Burke, Mahoney & Wise, Dennis T. Schoen, Chicago, IL, Carl Duhon, Duhon Law Firm, Lafayette, LA, L. Richard Musat, Treece, Alfrey, Musat & Bosworth, PC, Denver, CO, Jeff Ralston, Wilmot, May & Ralston, Stanford, KY David L. Bohannon, Nora J. Shepherd, Walter G. Ecton, Jr., Sword, Floyd & Moody, PLLC, Richmond, KY, Stephen M. Jones, London, KY, Ephraim Woods Helton, Helton, Erwin & Associates, Danville, KY, Rhonda Hatfield-Jeffers, Richard Hay, Law Office of Richard Hay, William M. Thompson, Thompson & Thompson, Somerset, KY, James N. Osteen, Osteen & Osteen, Hinesville, GA, Kulbinder Singh Garcha, Doig & Garcha, for Plaintiffs.

Alan J. Brinkmeier, Linda J. Schneider, Michael J. Merlo, Merlo, Kanofsky, Brinkmeier & Gregg, Chicago, IL, Douglas W. Rennie, Matthew Elton Stubbs, Montgomery, Rennie & Johnson, Cincinnati, OH, Edward H. Stopher, Richard W. Edwards, Ronald L. Green, Boehl, Stopher & Graves, Louisville, KY, L. Richard Musat, Treece, Alfrey, Musat & Bosworth, PC, Denver, CO, J. Arthur Mozley, Sewell K. Loggins, Mozley, Finlayson & Loggins LLP, Atlanta, GA, Kevin G. Henry, Phillip M. Moloney, Sturgill, Turner, Barker & Moloney PLLC, Lexington, KY, for Defendants.

David T. Royse, Perry M. Bentley, Robert M. Watt, III; Steven Brian Loy, Stoll Keenon Ogden, PLLC, Lexington, KY, Gerard R. Lear, Speiser Krause, Arlington, VA, Kenneth P. Nolan, Speiser, Krause, Nolan & Granito, New York, NY, for Movants.

OPINION AND ORDER

FORESTER, Senior District Judge.

These wrongful death actions arise out of the crash of Comair Flight 5191 at Lexington, Kentucky, on August 27, 2006. The above-named cases were filed in Fayette Circuit Court and were removed to this Court by the Defendant. All of the Comair Flight 5191 cases before this Court were consolidated for pretrial purposes by a January 22, 2007 Case Management Order [DE # 282].

This matter is before the Court on the Motions to Remand by Plaintiffs Adams [DE # 77], Hebert [DE # 93], C. Washington [DE # 88], First Citizens Bank of Elizabethtown for N. Kono [DE # 140], First Citizens Bank of Elizabethtown for T. Kono [DE # 141], Curry [DE # 168], Demrow, Byrd, Finley, Briscoe, Ryan, Theodore, Threet [DE # 191], Bizzack [DE # 220], Trimble [DE # 258], Thomason [DE # 262], Frederick [DE # 261], and Combs [DE # 317]. These motions, having been fully briefed, are ripe for review.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Plaintiffs in the above-named cases filed their actions in Fayette Circuit Court against, various Comair corporate entities (collectively "Comair"). Comair removed all of the actions to this Court alleging "federal question jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1337 because federal law governs the Plaintiffs right of recovery and because Plaintiffs Complaint includes allegations that raise a substantial issue of federal law." More specifically, Comair argued:

The Plaintiffs action is one in which this Court has original jurisdiction under the provisions of Title 28, United States Code §§ 1331 and 1337 and one which can be removed to this Court by Comair pursuant to the provisions of Title 28, United States Code § 1441, in that the Plaintiff's right to institute a claim for monetary damages arises under federal law which, pursuant to the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 ("1958 Act"), P.L. 85-726, 72 Stat. 731, formerly codified as 49 U.S.C. § 1301 et seq., now recodified and incorporated into 49 U.S.C. § 40101, et seq., and the regulations promulgated thereunder, implicitly preempts state law standards governing aviation safety, flight operations, takeoff procedures, and flight crew procedures, which Plaintiff alleges Comair to have violated.

The Plaintiffs claims also necessarily depend upon resolution of substantial questions of federal law, i.e., whether the federal aviation legislation enacted by Congress and the regulations promulgated thereunder were intended to preclude a liability finding against an interstate air carrier which operated pursuant to the relevant federal standards and whether the use of state law to regulate the flight operations of a carrier engaged in interstate air commerce constitutes an unconstitutional burden on interstate commerce. The U.S. Supreme Court has long recognized that federal question jurisdiction extends to state law claims that inherently involve resolution of a substantial issue of federal law. See, e.g., Grable & Sons Metal Products, Inc. v. Dante Eng'g & Mfg., [545 U.S. 308,] 128 [125] S.Ct. 2363, 162 L.Ed.2d 257 (2005); Franchise Tax Board v. Const. Laborers Vacation Trust, 463 U.S. 1, 13, 103 S.Ct. 2841, 77 L.Ed.2d 420 (1983).

Plaintiffs Complaint implicates aviation safety but it includes claims predicated on alleged violations of state or common law standards of care. However, courts have long recognized and held that federal law, namely the 1958 Act, exclusively regulates the field of aviation safety and displaces all state and common law that purports to establish the standard of care applicable to an air carrier's conduct in this field. [Citations omitted; emphasis in original.]

In Greene v. B.F. Goodrich Avionics Sys., Inc., 409 F.3d 784 (6th Cir.2005), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals adopted Abdullah v. American Airlines, 181 F.3d 363 (3rd Cir.1999).

Jurisdiction is also, or will be, appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b), as Comair has been served with an Amended Complaint in a related matter styled Opal Blockson, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Joann Wright, deceased, v. Comair, Inc., United States District Court, Eastern District of Kentucky, Covington Division, Case No. 06-CV-00175-KSF, wherein the plaintiff has averred her initiation of administrative proceedings to assert a claim against the United States of America, via the assertion of a claim against an employee of the Federal Aviation Administration.

Jurisdiction is also, or will be, appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, as Comair has been named in a Complaint filed in a related matter, Landmark v. Comair, Inc., United States District Court, Eastern District of Kentucky, Covington Division, Case No. 06-CV-00305-KSF, wherein the plaintiff avers that the decedent was a resident of Canada and the action arises under a treaty of the United States of America, namely the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Relating to International Transportation by Air, concluded at Montreal, Canada, on May 28, 1999 (the "Montreal Convention").

The language in each separate removal notice was the same, except as noted below; see, for example, the removal notices in Case No. 06-CV-313-KSF, DE # 1; Case No. 06-CV-327-KSF, DE # 1; Case No. 06-CV-333-KSF, DE # 2; and Case No. 06-CV-337-KSF, DE # 1. The last paragraph above was omitted in removal notices for the following cases: Case No. 06-CV-392-KSF; Case No. 06-CV-411-KSF; Case No. 06-CV-413-KSF; Case No. 06-CV-412-KSF; and Case No. 07-CV-006-KSF.

In the Demrow case, No. 06-CV-371-KSF, Comair added that federal jurisdiction was mandatory "because three of Plaintiffs' decedents were traveling internationally. Passengers Bobbie Sue Benton and Jesse Clark Benton were traveling to Aruba and Brian Byrd was traveling to St. Lucia" [DE # 1, p. 6]. It continued: "the Montreal Convention is...