We periodically post on this page a sampling of legal decisions, briefs, papers and other information of interest. Please feel free to contact James & Hoffman for further information on these or other matters.

April 26, 2004 Legal Times article on the firm and its practice.

• Fleischman v. Albany Medical Center, 06-CV-0765 (N.D. N.Y. July 22, 2010)
  U.S. District Court wholly denies hospitals' summary judgment and Daubert motions and grants in part a motion by a class of hospital nurses to exclude certain testimony by the hospitals' expert at trial, while denying Defendants' mirror motion to exclude the testimony of Plaintiffs' expert. Court finds that (1) the nurses' proof that hospitals engaged in frequent, detailed exchanges of current nurse wage information supports an inference of per se illegal collusion in settling nurse wages; (2) Plaintiffs' proffered expert used sound, reliable economic principles applied to undisputed facts to find that nurse wages in the Albany market were 21% suppressed; and (3) Plaintiffs' "softening competition" theory plus the 21% suppression supported a reasonable inference of causation.
  
  
• Fleischman v. Albany Medical Center, 06-CV-0765 (N.D. N.Y. July 21, 2010)
  U.S. District Court denies unionized hospital's motion for summary judgment on antitrust claims by a class of hospital nurses, holding that (1) the nonstatutory labor exemption from the antitrust laws does not shield a unionized hospital from liability for colluding with other hospitals to suppress wages and (2) whether the wages in the hosptial's collective bargaining agreements with its nurses union were confidemtial or not was an issue for a jury to decide.
  
  
• Canada v. American Airlines, Inc. Pilot Retirement Benefit Program, C.A. No. 3:09-0127(M.D. Tenn. July 21, 2009)
  U.S. District Court denies Pension Plan’s Motion to Transfer Venue and to Dismiss airline pilot’s ERISA claims concerning Plan’s suspension of his retirement benefits while flying after age 60 without an actuarial adjustment when he retires, holding that plaintiff’s choice of forum should not be disturbed for convenience of witnesses when one defendant is a transportation company and case is likely to be resolved on dispositive motion and that plaintiff had adequately stated claim for declaration of future benefits and breach of fiduciary duty under ERISA.
  
  
• Lee v. Allied Pilots Association, C.A. No. 4:08-CV-542-Y (N.D. Texas July 14, 2009)
  U.S. District Court decision holding that Union sponsored disability income plan did not violate the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act by denying benefit claim because the Plan did not provide “health insurance,” and the protections of the Act were not applicable.
  
  
• Furland v. American Airlines, Inc., No. 2008-AIR-0001 (ALJ May 21, 2009)
  ALJ decision after trial finding employer violated whistleblower protection statute (Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21^st Century – “AIR21”) by docking pilot’s pay for calling in sick after being warned about prior frequent use of sick leave.
  
  
• Wagner v. Allied Pilots Association Disability Income Plan, C.A. No. 08-0750 (N.D. Ill. January 16, 2009; May 18, 2009)
  Two decisions of U.S. District Court, the first granting partial summary judgment to Union sponsored disability income plan on the ground that Plan committed no violation of ERISA by declining to reconsider denial of claimant's benefit appeal on a request lodged outside of the Plan's time limits for appeals, and the second granting summary judgment to Plan on remaining claims on the ground that Plan's reliance on opinion of outside medical consultant and not on the views of claimant's doctors to deny benefit claim was neither arbitrary nor capricious.
  
  
• In the Matter of Transport Workers Union of America, Local 545, and Transport Workers Union of America, Local 542 (Seniority Integration) (Harris, Bloch, Arbs.) (April 26, 2007)
  Arbitration decision in seniority integration dispute arising out of airline merger between Flight Dispatchers at U.S. Airways, Inc., and Dispatchers at America West Airlines, Inc., adopting date of hire methodology proposed by U.S. Airways Dispatchers. See also arbitration brief on behalf of Local 545 (U.S. Airways) Dispatchers.
  
  
• Reed v. Advocate Health Care, No. 06 C 337, No. 06 C 3569 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22816, 154 Lab. Cas. (CCH) P35, 277 (N.D. Ill. March 28, 2007)
  U.S. District Court decision holding that the nonstatutory labor exemption to the antitrust laws does not apply to an employer simply because it had a collective bargaining agreement with a union during the time period of the alleged antitrust conspiracy, and further holding that the legitimacy of the employer's actions in sharing wage information with competitors is not solely within the jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Board. See also Plaintiffs' brief in opposition to motion for summary judgment.
  
  
• National Security Archive v. Air Force, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21037 (D.D.C. April 19, 2006)
  U.S. District Court decision and orders holding that the Air Force engaged in a pattern or practice of violating the Freedom of Information Act with respect to requests from the nonprofit National Security Archive, and ordering various forms of relief. See also a story by the Associated Press on the lawsuit.
  
  
• Kitty Hawk AirCargo, Inc. v. Elaine Chao, 418 F.3d 453 (5th Cir. 2005)
  U.S. Court of Appeals decision holding that government contractor air carrier lacks standing to challenge Department of Labor determination that pilots are not exempt as "professionals" from the protections of the Service Contract Act. See also pilot's brief to the Fifth Circuit.
  
  
• Bensel v. Allied Pilots Ass’n, 387 F.3d 298 (3rd Cir. 2004)
  U.S. Court of Appeals decision holding that Labor Union owed no duty to non-members of bargaining unit and breached no duty after pilots from purchased carriers joined the unit. See also Union's brief to the Third Circuit and opposition to certiorari in the Supreme Court.
  
  
• Kaufman v. Allied Pilots Ass’n, 274 F.3d 197 (5th Cir. 2001), cert. denied, 122 S. Ct. 1790 (2002)
  U.S. Court of Appeals decision holding that Garmon preemption doctrine of federal labor law bars airline passengers’ state tort claims against union for peaceful pilots’ strike in violation of federal court injunction issued under the RLA. See also Union’s brief to the Fifth Circuit and opposition to certiorari in the Supreme Court.
  
  
• Clemmons v. Ameristar Airways, Inc., No. 2004-AIR-11 (ALJ Jan. 14, 2005)
  ALJ decision, after five day trial on the merits, finding in favor of whistleblower in retaliatory discharge case under the Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century. The ALJ confirmed his decision on remand from the Administrative Review Board. See Decision and Order on Remand (Feb. 29, 2008). The ARB has affirmed that decision. See Final Decision and Order (May 26, 2010).
  
  
• Carey v. Allied Pilots Ass’n, No. 4:03-CV-277-Y (N. D. Tex., April 14, 2003)
  U.S. District Court decision denying application for temporary restraining order to prevent completion of ratification vote on collective bargaining agreement with American Airlines. See also Union’s brief in opposition to TRO.
  
  
• United Farmworkers of America v. Chao, 227 F. Supp. 2d 102 (D.D.C. 2002)
  U.S. District Court decision in favor of the United Farm Workers and the Farm Labor Organizing Committee, enjoining the Department of Labor to issue timely, adjusted minimum wage rates for migrant farmworkers each year. See also a news article on the court decision from the Spring 2003 Farmworker Justice News.
  
  
• Allen v. American Airlines, Inc., No. N-539-DWH (D. Nev. September 14, 2001)
  U.S. District Court decision holding that Allied Pilots Association did not violate its duty of fair representation in integrating the seniority of pilots employed by an air carrier that had been purchased by American Airlines.
  
  
• In the Matter of Allied Pilots Association and American Airlines, Inc., Darrah Presidential Grievance 02-145 (ASM/Block Hour Freeze)(Goldberg, Arb.). Two related arbitral decisions, the first from October 2003 finding that American Airlines violated a contractual cap on outsourcing during a pilot furlough (in part through use of a proxy airline designator code), and the second, from April 2004 awarding the pilot union over $23 million in damages for that violation.
  
  
• Georgetown University Faculty Grievances
  Decisions sustaining challenges to Georgetown University faculty compensation plan. See also subsequent federal court complaint seeking enforcement of grievance decisions on behalf of Georgetown faculty.
  
  

• CAPA, et al. v. Federal Aviation Administration, et al.: Brief to the D.C. Circuit in proceeding brought by the Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations and other airline industry unions challenging new FAA and TSA licensing regulations on Constitutional and statutory grounds.
  
  
• Does I Through XXV v. the Gap, Inc.: Amicus Brief to the Ninth Circuit on behalf of United Steel Workers, UNITE and SEIU, supporting claims under international law and the Alien Tort Claims Act by victims of forced labor in Saipan.
  
  
• Kaufman v. Allied Pilots Ass’n: Union’s brief to Fifth Circuit defending against class action lawsuits seeking damages for work stoppage in violation of federal court order. See also opposition to certiorari in Supreme Court.
  
  
• Allied Pilots Ass’n v. PBGC: Union’s brief to D.C. Circuit in pending litigation contesting PBGC termination of former TWA pilots’ pension plan.
  
  
• Carey v. Allied Pilots Ass’n: Union’s brief to District Court defending against plaintiffs’ attempt to halt the completion of contract ratification vote.
  
  
• Eastern Pilots Merger Committee v. Continental Airlines, Inc.: Amicus brief to Supreme Court in support of petition for certiorari.
  
  

---