US Pilots Labor Discussion

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

Great Googlie Mooglie!!
The Mighty Marty “Harpie-r “ whacked by Judge “Rosylin” the ROD O’silver. Legal malpractice and professional negligence, Read on.

NO. CIV-04-1367 PHX ROS
ENERGEX ENTERPRISES, INC., a Colorado corporation; and BRAD GEUKE, an
individual, Plaintiffs,

vs.

SHUGHART, THOMSON & KILROY, P.C., a Missouri
professional corporation d/b/a SHUGHART THOMSON KILROY GOODWIN
RAUP; and, MARTY HARPER, EDWARD R. GLADY, JR., VICTORIA STEVENS,
and KELLY FLOOD, individuals, and BLACK & WHITE CORPORATIONS
I-X; and JOHN DOES I-X and JANE DOES I-X, Defendants. SHUGHART,
THOMSON & KILROY, P.C., a Missouri professional corporation d/b/a
SHUGHART THOMSON KILROY GOODWIN RAUP, Counterclaimant, vs. ENERGEX
ENTERPRISES, INC., a Colorado corporation, Counterdefendant.
NO. CIV-04-1367 PHX ROS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58395

August 17, 2006, Decided

OPINION BY: Roslyn O. Silver

On July 2, 2004, Plaintiffs filed a Complaint against Defendants (Doc. # 1), followed by an Amended Complaint on October 7, 2004 (Doc. # 4). Plaintiffs allege two counts: professional negligence and breach of contract. Both counts are based on Defendants' representation for the settlement and drafting of the settlement agreement in the first civil action.

B. Causation
Defendants have moved for Partial Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs' legal malpractice claim. In order to
prove legal malpractice, Plaintiffs must establish "(1) the existence of an attorney-client relationship which imposes a duty on the attorney to exercise that degree of skill, care and knowledge commonly exercised by members of the profession, (2) breach of that duty, (3) that such negligence was a proximate cause of resulting injury, and (4) the fact and extent of the injury." Phillips v. Clancy, 152 Ariz. 415, 733 P.2d 300, 303 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). Plaintiffs claim that Defendants' negligent representation and negligent drafting of the settlement agreement caused them various damages including lost revenues, attorneys' fees, and emotional pain and suffering.

A. Legal Standard
Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(c), after pleadings are closed any party may move for judgment on the pleadings. "A district court will render a judgment on the pleadings when the moving party clearly establishes on the face of the pleadings that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law."

B. Breach of Contract
Defendants have moved for Judgment on the Pleadings regarding Claim II, the Breach of Contract claim.
(Doc. # 85) Under Arizona law, breach of the duties owed by attorneys to their clients arises out of tort, not contract. Barmat v. John & Jane Doe Partners, 155 Ariz. 519, 747 P.2d 1218, 1222 (Ariz. 1987) ("The cause of action for malpractice would exist even if the client or patient had expressly declined the professional's services."). A legal malpractice claim can only arise out of contract if there is evidence of a specific promise that was breached apart from the duty imposed by law.

OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is Defendants' Motion forPartial Summary Judgment (Doc. # 64), Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. # 85), and a number of [*2] procedural and evidentiary motions. For the following reasons, Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment will be denied and the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings will be granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED trial is set for November 14, 2006 at 9 a.m.


DATED this 17th day of August, 2006.
Rosiyn O. Silver
United States District Judge



You can all bet your bippies that Marty didn’t go to trial.(Lexus Nexus has no trial record of this complaint.) They did a deal.
Ouch….that’s gotta hurt. Hey Marty…there goes an ambulance, fetch boy, fetch.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

oldie..has a Federal judge ever reversed illegal actions by a union and the company that agreed to such illegal actions? I'll give you a hint and it starts with an A.

Otter

Big clue here: there have been NO illegal actions.

 

[luvthe9]

Wow! Is this true? Only a few dozen? In Charlotte? What a joke. CO mustered up over 300 pilots in EWR for our last picketing event.

I can just picture them standing in silence. Management is laughing in their board room. They would really be better off not even having events if they can't get a better turnout.

Wow! Is this true? Only a few dozen....." Believe it Jetzz. Your Mesa buddies you support only tell the truth. Amazing how they can be flying one of their PHX out and backs and see all the way to CLT!!!

 

[luvthe9]

Yeah..ok...lightens her load....yeah sure. "Put on the record." There is no record. The only thing that remains after this case is the bill.

That one was really funny! For some reason the west can't comprehend the 9th, or the meaning of Clean Slate. The funny part is they paid the schyster Marty Harper millions for a clean slate they can't use anywhere other than on a message board

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Sorry, but around here we don't need proof. Your rules, remember?

It's YOUR credibility. Oh, that's right. You have NONE.

Whoever said you don't need proof? Certainly not me. I only said that if you make a claim, YOU need to back it up. If something has been posted ad nauseam on this board, don't expect to get an answer.

 

[OTTER574]

Big clue here: there have been NO illegal actions.

Sure oldie...

“By deferring judicial intervention, we leave USAPA to bargain in good faith pursuant to its DFR, with the interests of all members — both East and West — in mind, under pain of an unquestionably ripe DFR suit, once a contract is ratified.” (Ninth Op., FN1. p.8008).

Otter

 

[767jetz]

It's YOUR credibility. Oh, that's right. You have NONE.

Whoever said you don't need proof? Certainly not me. I only said that if you make a claim, YOU need to back it up. If something has been posted ad nauseam on this board, don't expect to get an answer.

Whatever you say junior. We know your real identity.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Sure oldie...

“By deferring judicial intervention, we leave USAPA to bargain in good faith pursuant to its DFR, with the interests of all members — both East and West — in mind, under pain of an unquestionably ripe DFR suit, once a contract is ratified.” (Ninth Op., FN1. p.8008).

Otter

It doesn't say ANYTHING about an illegal action. You keep quoting that sentence, which doesn't support your argument at all. Just because a case becomes ripe doesn't mean you'll prevail.

But keep up the stupid arguments, if you wish. It just shows exactly how out of touch with reality you are.

 

[luvthe9]

Sure oldie...

“By deferring judicial intervention, we leave USAPA to bargain in good faith pursuant to its DFR, with the interests of all members — both East and West — in mind, under pain of an unquestionably ripe DFR suit, once a contract is ratified.” (Ninth Op., FN1. p.8008).

Otter

Now I am really starting to get how and why Leonidas gets $$ and why Harper puts ridiculous ideas for lawsuits out there and the west buys off on them...

 

[luvthe9]

But keep up the stupid arguments, if you wish. It just shows exactly how out of touch with reality you are.

Oldie, they know it's over for them and they have no other defense. They love to spin there wheels and they are under the spell of the Rev.Jim Jones, (aka Ferguson).

 

[OTTER574]

Now I am really starting to get how and why Leonidas gets $$ and why Harper puts ridiculous ideas for lawsuits out there and the west buys off on them...

Can you please state and quote one LEGAL Precedent that usapa has achieved?

I know the list will be very short meaning "0"..but I'm all ears............

Otter

 

[OTTER574]

It doesn't say ANYTHING about an illegal action. You keep quoting that sentence, which doesn't support your argument at all. Just because a case becomes ripe doesn't mean you'll prevail.

But keep up the stupid arguments, if you wish. It just shows exactly how out of touch with reality you are.

You ever heard the term check followed by the term checkmate? usapa is painted in the bradford/cleary corner with no where else to run.

Otter

 

[BoeingBoy]

Heck, Otter, they can't even understand that "not ripe" doesn't mean that the Nic is dead. They're convinced that their little sound bites actually mean something in court.

Jim

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

The company has accepted a LEGAL list oldie...By all means take this to the NMB and get parked indefinitely. The NMB is not usapa's BABY SITTER!

Otter

Ray was overly optimistic at the mike during the picket. Release? that's a good one.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

You ever heard the term check followed by the term checkmate? usapa is painted in the bradford/cleary corner with no where else to run.

Otter

Just wait. You'll see I'm correct. Doug tried several times to explain that "accepted the list" thing to you. You're too thick to understand. Don't worry, it will all be clear soon enough. Go ask your lawyers just who has the advantage here, before you continue to make a fool of yourself.