IN RE: Air Crash Near Denver, Colorado, on October 3, 1969

Case MDL No. 88 Document 2 Filed 04/30/15 Page 1 of 4
JUDIBIAL BAT oy Th
: co PULTE AICT LITA To = .
| - BEFORE THE JUDICIAL PANEL IERON
MULTIDISTRICT-LITIGATION . TLE29 1872
IN RE AIR CRASH NEAR DENVER, ) } DOCKET No| #8COLORADO ON OCTOBER 3, 1969 ) To re
: 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
The crash of an airplane operated by Metro Commuter
Airlines near Denver, Colorado in 1969 led to the filing of
four actions.in four &istricts-	bys passengers and crew and
their representatives. The United States, a common defendant,
Ao moves for the transfer of all cases to the District of ColoradoB for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant
| to 28 U.S.C. §1407. We find the actions appropriate for
transfer to Colorado.
The United States has cited numerous decisions of the
Panel transferring litigation arising out of airplane accidents
for pretrial proceedings under Section 1407. See, e.g., In
re Las Vegas, Nevada Air Disaster, F. Supp. (J.P.M.L.
1971); In re San Antonio, Venezuela Air Disaster, 331 F. Supp.
547 (J.P.M.L. 1971); In re Sal Juan, Puerto Rico Air Disaster,
316 F. Supp. 981 (J.P.M.L. 1970); In re Fairland, Indiana Air
* Although Judges Murrah, Weinfeld and Robson were not present
at the hearing they have, with the consent of all parties, partici-
® pated in this decision.

Case MDL No. 88 Document2 Filed 04/30/15 Page	2 of 4
. ,
Ss Disaster, 309 F. Supp. 621(J,P.M.L. 1970). Several plain-
tiffs and defendant Beech Aircraft Corporation oppose transfer
on the ground that voluntary coordination of discovery will
eliminate any problems in this litigation. In addition, Beech,
a defendant in only one of the California cases, asserts that
it has filed a motion to dismiss in California and would find
it prejudicially expensive to fly counsel to Colorado to
participate in pretrial proceedings there.
We see no indication that voluntary coordination would
be effective in these cases and we have previously stated "that
Section 1407 was intended to proyide a procedure which would
insure that repetitious and duplicative discovery is avoided
® by providing that all related actions be assigned to a single
judge." In re Frost Patent Litigation, 316 F. Supp. 977, 979
(J.P.M.L. 1970) . For the same reasons we must reject Beech's
"worm's eye view" of the litigation. In re Childrens' Book
Antitrust Litigation, 297 F. Supp. 385, 386 (J.P.M.L. 1968).
Finally, two passenger plaintiffs suggest that their
cases should not be transferred for pretrial proceedings with
actions brought by representatives of two deceased crew members.
While the two types of cases may raise different legal issues,
they still share a common factual background which will result
in duplicative discovery unless transferred to a single district
for pretrial proceedings. In re Greater Cincinnati Air Disaster,
295 F. Supp. 51 (J.P.M.L. 1968).
@ :

Case MDL No. 88 Document2 Filed 04/30/15 Page	3 of 4
No party has contested the choice of Colorado as trans-
feree forum and we think the reasons for its selection are clear.
Because the plane crashed near the Denver airport, many eyewitnesses
will be located in the area. And the air traffic controllers
involved in monitoring the flight are located at the Denver air-
port. The tapes of the conversations between the tower and the
flight crew are also there and any FAA documents relevant to the
litigation are either in Denver or Washington, D.C.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the actions listed on the
attached Schedule A be, and hereby are, transferred to the
District of Colorado 2nd, with the consent of that court, are
assigned to the Honorable Fred M. Winner for coordinated or
® consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1407.
@ |

Case MDL No. 88 Document 2 Filed 04/30/15 Page 4 of 4
DOCKET NO. 88 TTT TT. - SCHEDULE A
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
Vera Reisinger, etc. v. United States of Civil Action
America No. 71-C-6-CR
y DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Robert E. Deweese v. United States of Civil Action
America No. C-3097
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jeanne T. Vesey, etc. v. United States of Civil Action
America No. 71-2434-LTL
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Floyd A. Demanes, etc v. Beech Aircraft Corp., Civil Action
et al. No. C-71-1669~-1HB