IN RE AIR CRASH DISASTER AT FLORIDA EVERGLADES ON DECEMBER 29, 1972
| Decision Date | 14 December 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 139.,139. |
| Citation | 368 F. Supp. 812 |
| Parties | In re AIR CRASH DISASTER AT FLORIDA EVERGLADES ON DECEMBER 29, 1972. Gerald Eskow and Joan Eskow v. Eastern Airlines, Inc., et al., S. D. New York, Civil Action No. 73 Civ. 2327 Sarah Stark, etc. v. Eastern Airlines, Inc., et al., S. D. New York, Civil Action No. 73 Civ. 2328 Herbert Fersko and Molly Fersko v. Eastern Airlines, Inc., et al., S. D. New York, Civil Action No. 73 Civ. 2329 |
| Court | Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation |
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.
The Panel previously transferred all actions in this litigation to the Southern District of Florida and, with the consent of that court, assigned them to the Honorable Peter T. Fay for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407. In re Florida Everglades Air Disaster Litigation, 360 F.Supp. 1394 (Jud.Pan.Mult.Lit., June 28, 1973). Since that time, the above-captioned actions were removed from state court to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The Panel issued an order conditionally transferring these actions to the Southern District of Florida for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings with the actions previously transferred to that district. Plaintiffs oppose transfer. On the basis of the briefs filed and the hearing held, we find that transfer of these actions to the Southern District of Florida will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Plaintiffs in each action have filed motions seeking remand of their respective actions to New York state court. They urge the Panel to postpone any decision on the question of transfer until those motions have been determined.1 We see no reason for delaying our decision. Because these actions involve questions of fact identical to those raised in the actions previously transferred by the Panel, transfer is necessary in order to eliminate the possibility of duplicative discovery and conflicting pretrial rulings. Furthermore, the transferee judge certainly has the power to determine the question of remand. See in re Plumbing Fixtures Litigation, 298 F.Supp. 484, 495-496 (Jud.Pan. Mult.Lit.1968).
Plaintiffs also request the Panel to reconsider its initial decision designating the Southern...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Interstate Serv. Provider, Inc. v. Jordan
...2020). 3. This is particularly the case since the JPML cannot resolve motions to remand. In re Air Crash Disaster at Fla. Everglades on Dec. 29, 1972, 368 F. Supp. 812, 813 n.1 (J.P.M.L. 1973); see George T. Conway III, Note, The Consolidation of Multistate Litigation in State Courts, 96 YA......
-
In re New England Mut. Life Ins. Co. Sales
...Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. Sales Practices Litig., 170 F.Supp.2d 1346, 1347 (J.P.M.L.2001); In re Air Crash Disaster at Florida Everglades on December 29, 1972, 368 F.Supp. 812, 813 (J.P.M.L.1973). Furthermore, the arguments that defendants offer in support of their assertion of law are err......
-
Sherfey v. Volkswagen Grp. of Am., Inc.
...170 F. Supp. 2d 1346, 1347 (J.P.M.L. 2001), citing In re Ivy, 901 F.2d 7 (2nd Cir.1990); In re Air Crash Disaster at Florida Everglades on December 29, 1972, 368 F.Supp. 812, 813 (J.P.M.L.1973). "Whether to grant a stay of proceedings pending a final ruling of the MDL Panel on the transfer ......
-
Ivy, In re
...or the merits of a case, including issues relating to a motion to remand. See In re Air Crash Disaster at Florida Everglades on December 29, 1972, 368 F.Supp. 812, 813 n. 1 (J.P.M.D.L.1973) (per curiam) (citing 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1407). Moreover, Section 1407(e) authorizes us to review only cer......