← Back to Squawk list

43

Boeing, Southwest Airlines Sued for Alleged Collusion Over 737 MAX 8

1년 전 제출됨

Southwest Airlines Co. and The Boeing Co. were hit with a lawsuit by Southwest customers who say the companies colluded to hide a fatal design defect in Boeing’s 737 MAX 8 aircraft. The complaint, filed July 11 in a federal court in Texas under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, alleges Southwest obtained profits through a collusive relationship with Boeing, its sole airplane supplier. (news.bloomberglaw.com) 기타...

51 멤버 코멘트

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

Randy Brown 1년 전 17

This article says more about the state of the legal system and the abuses by the trial lawyers than about airplanes.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

William Lucas 1년 전 1

Couldn't agree more! Some of these would have complained about flights being cancelled by the airline due to the fault being discovered! Just like the idiots who demand a plane takes of in dense fog with a foot of snow on the wings!!!!

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

James Kabrajee 1년 전 0

Amen!

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Robert Cowling 1년 전 14

Seems like a long shot. But if there was collusion, that's pretty damning for Southwest, and Boeing.

Imagine Southwest knowing about the problem with the Max, and not telling their pilots. Wow...

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

John D 1년 전 3

I was thinking the same thing.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Mike Dryden 1년 전 0

The gist seems to be not that much different between the legal battles on a global level: Emirates getting government support to swamp the world, thus obtaining profits, Boeing getting preference on X government requirement, thus obtaining profits, Airbus getting Y government support thus obtaining profits.

This could take years and the complainants will run out of cash to fund it before SW/Boeing does.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

ALLAN LEEDY 1년 전 6

Southwest clearly complicit, having extracted a penalty of hundreds of millions of dollars if it turns out pilot training is required. That’s why MCAS was concealed from pilots even to the point of eliminating redundancy and disagree light.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Rick Hunt 1년 전 13

Let's assume it is all true. What are the damages to customers? I don't recall a Southwest plane crashing. Like to or not that is how a court will look at the lawsuit.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

btweston 1년 전 6

Violations of RICO, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and negligence.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Greg Sergienko 1년 전 3

If by "customers" Rick Hunt meant "passengers"--that's what I was asusming--there's still a problem with showing damages. If "customers" means the airlines--not what this complaint alleges--they might well have a RICO complaint against Boeing. For a variety of reasons, I don't think it likely that such a complaint would be filed.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Rico van Dijk 1년 전 2

Nah, no one violated me ;)

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

JMARTINSON 1년 전 2

Case dismissed.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Thomas Scally 1년 전 2

I doubt a judge will even certify the class.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

mary susan watkins 1년 전 2

rick..i am not an attorney,but a class action lawsuit is the right of passengers who have been flying on southwest,prior to the announcement about the max 737,as their fleet is totally boeing 737,both the older model and the max..there have already been reports the faa did not do thorough inspections of the aircraft before certifying it as airworthy on all counts and able to be put into service..if it can be proven with evidenciary information to a court,that boeing knowingly sold the airplane with defects,and southwest knowingly bought them,as well as bringing in the faa overlooks,the lawsuit will go forward..it also was reported that boeing stated the computer program in question was considerd an "option" for an individual carrier to purchase with the aircraft,or not,and it was not put on all that were being manufactured..a judge will decide if the lawsuit can go through or will be dismissed for whatever reason...

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Thomas Scally 1년 전 1

There has to be real damages. Fundamental of law.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

William Lucas 1년 전 1

If the FAA knew, then THEY are the one's who should be sued for failing to take action!

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Michael McMurtrey 1년 전 7

Ultimately, the only people who are gonna make any money off this airplane are the attorneys.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

ALLAN LEEDY 1년 전 0

Some crash victims will score.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Greg Sergienko 1년 전 4

All the people on the plans are dead, so they're not scoring.

Few, if any, of the family members will recover an amount that approximates their loss. Where the damages are large, the survivors are under pressure to settle to replace the lost earnings immediately. Boeing, the airlines, and their insurers will present a united front and wait.

From news reports, it seems that some family members have given up their rights for relatively small amounts. In a case like this, they may not even recover their provable economic losses.

Depending on what law applies, there may be recoveries for psychological injuries to survivors, but juries are skeptical about this.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

LethalThreat 1년 전 10

Man, now this is one crazy conspiracy theory. People just want free money nowaydays.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

James Murdock 1년 전 3

If you count class action lawyers as "people"... The humans in the class will typically get a bit under $1 each.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Ron Streetenberger 1년 전 3

Southwest kept the MCAS system a big secret? That would be like management saying "Let's see how many pilots crash before they figure it out". Is that what they are saying?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

pilotjag 1년 전 3

Copy of the complaint filed against Boeing and WN can be found below...
https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/COMPLAINTagainstAllDefendantsFilingfee400receiptnumber05407344215?1562935133

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

sandro98 1년 전 3

I'm not overly familiar with how complaints normally look, but reading through the first few pages seems like it was completed so people would have headlines to reference in the future, but nothing that seems actually a concern...

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Greg Sergienko 1년 전 6

That's a pretty typical drafting style for a high-profile case like this. Collusion complaints are easy to make, but since the Supreme Court's decisions in Twombly and Iqbal, the plaintiffs will have to have evidence that goes beyond multiple defendants acting separately in their common interest. Unless the plaintiffs come up with this, the case will be dismissed before the defendants even have to answer.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

JMARTINSON 1년 전 5

If this is typical drafting style for a high-profile case, I'll just assume court filings for the less notable cases are written in crayon.

"Like a tale from some science fiction dystopia, a computer system the crew knew nothing about had taken control of the airplane and crashed it"

I did not scroll back up to see if the first paragraph started out with "It was a dark and stormy night". I don't want to know.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Greg Sergienko 1년 전 2

Nah, it's just that they're hoping to attract headlines. That's somewhat likely with a case like this but not with others.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Greg Mermel 1년 전 3

Note the venue carefully: Federal Court for the EASTERN District of Texas - not NORTHERN District, where Southwest's Dallas headquarters are located.

The Eastern District used to be notorious for inviting "patent troll" litigation
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2017-05-25/the-texas-town-that-patent-trolls-built-j34rlmjc
https://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/patently-unfair/

and still has a reputation as a friendly venue for dubious cases
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/24/us/politics/texas-judge-obamacare.html

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Phil Howry 1년 전 3

It's a sad commentary on our society to believe people and/or organizations would knowingly/intentionally put human lives at risk merely for a profit motive.

The FAA, Southwest Airlines and Boeing are not in business to put people's lives in danger, that's a shameful and absurd accusation whether you call it "collusion" or not. Good hardworking Americans work for these entities and fly on these aircraft. What is the incentive for a company not to have every employee's safety their number one goal and concern at all times.

This lawsuit should be dismissed by the court and the attorneys sued for wasting the courts time with a frivolous lawsuit.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Phil Howry 1년 전 3

Wow, the term collusion has captivated the legal community.

Is there a possibility of "collusion" among the plaintiff and defense attorneys in this country? We have no domestic accident or incident involving a Boeing "Max 8" and yet "Southwest customers" allege collusion. Now, how would a customer(s) base know anything about the deep internal workings/dealings between any airline and their manufacturer?

Could it be investigating government agency attorneys/staff are leaking information (i.e., colluding) with their attorney acquaintances to hoodwink so-called "customers" to get involved for a potential big payoff?

This smells.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Bob Wysocki-Borejsza 1년 전 4

this may break the camel's back, Boeing will start laying off

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

scott ebrite 1년 전 5

So, just how did SW flight crews manage to fly the MAX "without training" and not scratch or bend them up?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

RC Pate 1년 전 5

Laughable.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

paul gilpin 1년 전 2

why is the FAA not mentioned?
because the trial judge is part of the legal community.
let's just give the FAA a pass.
again.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

redelmo 1년 전 3

What?!? Oh ya. It’s a huge coverup because southwest buys Boeing planes. What a stupid lawsuit. Making crap up to sue? This country’s justice system is ridiculous.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

nemosteve1080i 1년 전 2

I see nothing wrong with WN wanting an all Boeing 737 fleet. This allows efficiencies with training, maintenance, & staffing. In my career field, my employer tries to keep the equipment pool to a few manufacturers - Sony for HD cameras, Grass Valley for vision mixers, and EVS for record/playback servers. When my employer acquires a company with different gear, they do effort to upgrade to the afore mentioned manufacturers.

As far as WN having rushed the Boeing MAX8/9 into service, perhaps WN's management thought their "preferred customer" status was a little to cozy with Boeing? WN's greed to squeeze in 6 more seats or add a few hundred Km to aircraft range has come back to bite them.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Don Quixote 1년 전 -1

Rushed? How was it rushed, tell every other airline that has a MAX then. Southwest knows what they're doing.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

btweston 1년 전 1

You really don’t read the news, do you?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

JMARTINSON 1년 전 0

You mean the news that tells us it was rushed rather than tell us how long it took compared to the average or typical and let us draw our own conclusions. That news?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

btweston 1년 전 -7

Are you Boeing’s mom?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

JMARTINSON 1년 전 3

If I was your mom I'd ground you for a month.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Philip Taylor 1년 전 1

Might be safer all round! ð

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Philip Taylor 1년 전 1

What have the pilots to say about this?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Bryant Mook 1년 전 1

The attorneys must need to buy a new Bentley or the like. They are always looking for a sleezy way to make a dime (of coarse with public safety in mind, yea right) Albeit, Boeing management are more interested in the bottom line than listening to their own engineers. Their CEO ceased being a real engineer when he put profits ahead of safety.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

John Lessard 1년 전 1

Is Panda Express an airline?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

John Lessard 1년 전 1

Well knock me down and blow me. Who would have thought that. Just when I thought the industry was honest.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

George Cottay 1년 전 1

Pierce Bainbridge Beck Price & Hecht, the litigation boutique running the suit, is relatively new but very ambitious and working hard at rapid expansion. They style themselves as the next generation of litigation excellence. The firm is also gaining experience in defense. Donald Lewis, a former partner is claiming founder and managing partner John Pierce built the 2-year-old firm on “smoke and mirrors,” duping incoming partners about its prospects and misusing money from litigation funder Pravati Capital to prop up the firm and to cover Pierce’s own improper expenses. As evidence of mismanagement, Lewis notes that name partner Jim Bainbridge was one of several defendants who settled with the Federal Trade Commission in 1996 for a telemarketing scheme.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Bryant Mook 1년 전 1

What do you expect from a snake pit?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

curtis brake 1년 전 1

Too big to fail nobody to jail!

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Don Quixote 1년 전 -7

Oh! Another Anti-Being article! If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going. Screw you Airbus! I'm never going to be a sidestick kind of guy.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

btweston 1년 전 9

Um, no. This is an article reporting something that has happened.

Calm down.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

로그인

이 웹 사이트는 쿠키를 사용합니다. 이 웹 사이트를 사용하고 탐색함으로써 귀하는 이러한 쿠기 사용을 수락하는 것입니다.

종료

FlightAware 항공편 추적이 광고로 지원된다는 것을 알고 계셨습니까?

FlightAware.com의 광고를 허용하면 FlightAware를 무료로 유지할 수 있습니다. Flightaware에서는 훌륭한 경험을 제공할 수 있도록 관련성있고 방해되지 않는 광고를 유지하기 위해 열심히 노력하고 있습니다. FlightAware에서 간단히 광고를 허용 하거나 프리미엄 계정을 고려해 보십시오..

종료