Rose•Walker, L.L.P.

Trial Expertise

Interstate/Lycoming case

When general aviation airplanes equipped with Textron Lycoming piston engines began having catastrophic engine failures, Lycoming (and its parent, Textron) were in the spotlight.

They needed a scapegoat. Lycoming decided to blame a small Texas forging company, Interstate Southwest, which made forgings for the crankshafts in Lycoming engines. Lycoming even convinced the Federal Aviation Administration that it was Interstate Southwest’s fault.

When Interstate Southwest asked us for help, we performed an analysis that showed Lycoming was at fault. Our strategy: to learn more about Lycoming crankshafts than Lycoming knew itself. We started buying and testing Lycoming engines – eventually becoming one of the world’s largest owners of such engines. Our metallurgists and engineers put the engines through a sophisticated battery of tests more demanding than any Lycoming had ever conducted.

The result demonstrated that Lycoming had a design problem that had nothing to do with our client’s forgings.

Lycoming continued to demand over $183 million from our client so we proceeded to trial, where the jury ruled for us and against Lycoming. The jury found that the sole cause of the numerous crankshaft failures was a defect in Lycoming’s design. Further, the jurors said Lycoming had defrauded Interstate Southwest when it wrongly accused the Texas company of improper forging techniques. The jury awarded Interstate Southwest over $96 million in damages, which the court entered as a judgment shortly afterward. The case is on appeal.

Tweedell/Hochheim

When Hochheim Prairie Farm Mutual Insurance Association chose not to renew some of its unprofitable business and terminate the contracts of some of its agents, it was doing what it felt was best for the financial health of the company. It was also doing what was required by law in order to bring its written premium in line with state-mandated surplus requirements.

But four of the insurance agents who were slated for termination decided they didn’t like the plan and sued Hochheim, seeking injunctive relief and monetary damages under the Texas Insurance Code and the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices—Consumer Protection Act.

From the moment Hochheim hired us, we sensed that the case was being viewed as a bellwether by other former agents, who would bring their own claims if these four agents were successful in court.

We began trying the case immediately. First we asked for and received a change of venue from north Texas to the south Texas county Hochheim calls home. Through focused discovery and carefully crafted summary judgment motions, we began chipping away at the plaintiffs’ claims. When the matter ultimately proceeded to trial, the claims asserted were a fraction of those that had existed when the agents first filed their case.

The lawsuit concluded after a 10-day jury trial when counsel for plaintiffs, at the commencement of his final argument, dismissed his clients’ claims.

Avjet cases

Avjet is a corporate jet manager and charter operator that caters to the Southern California jet set.

In March 2001, Avjet was hired to ferry a group of people to a birthday party. As the Gulfstream III aircraft approached the Aspen Airport, it crashed into the mountains, killing 15 passengers and a crew of three. The National Transportation Safety Board reviewed the plane’s failed approach – in early evening hours and in a snowstorm – and concluded the crew had made a fatal error in judgment.

Avjet sought to accept responsibility and settle the claims of all the passengers. For some of the victims’ families, however, that wasn’t enough. These families wanted to punish Avjet with a significant punitive damage award - $40 million for the three crash victims they represented.

We represented Avjet during the lengthy, contentious trial that followed. When it was over, the jury returned its compensatory damage award totaling only $10.2 million. The case settled shortly thereafter.

Swissair

When Rose•Walker was called on to get involved in litigation tied to the crash of Swissair 111, its client – the company that had installed the planes’ onboard entertainment system – appeared culpable. All evidence tied the fire aboard the airliner to that entertainment system. The fire caused the MD-11 to crash into the sea, killing all aboard.

The aircraft manufacturer and commercial carrier settled the wrongful death claims of the 229 passengers and crew, but wanted Rose•Walker's client to help pay the damages, asserting that a faulty installation caused the in-flight fire.

But at Rose•Walker, we were able to develop persuasive evidence that pilot error and manufacturing defects were, in fact, the cause of the crash. The lawsuit settled shortly thereafter and the parties entered into an agreement to keep the terms of the settlement confidential.

Alaska Air

On Jan. 31, 2000, Alaska Airlines flight 261 crashed off the coast of California, killing all 88 people aboard.

Prior to the crash, pilots told ground controllers that they were having trouble controlling the airplane. Later, an investigation would show a failure of a component called a jackscrew, which helps move the horizontal stabilizer and in doing so, keeps the airplane stable in flight.

In the litigation that followed, Rose∙Walker represented the company that manufactured the jackscrew. While Alaska Airlines agreed to pay full compensatory damages to the families of those who died, it also tried to forestall discovery and keep others from finding out the true cause of the crash.

Rose∙Walker steadfastly maintained that our client had no liability for any manufacturing defect and pushed aggressively for Alaska Airlines to make its maintenance records public during the discovery process. Ultimately the court granted summary judgment in favor of Rose∙Walker’s client on all claims. And when details of the plane’s maintenance were made public, they showed the airline had failed to properly maintain and inspect the jackscrew.

The aircraft manufacturer and Alaska Airlines eventually settled the wrongful death claims of the passengers and crew for an undisclosed amount.

Lindsey Garretson case

Lindsey Garretson was a 17-year-old high school student, a member of the band and color guard, who was about to enter her senior year in high school. In 2000, while traveling down the road to visit a relative in Nashville, TN, her car was hit from behind by a truck, the driver of which had a long history of wrecks and traffic tickets.

Lindsey was killed.

At trial, Rose∙Walker was able to show that the truck driver’s previous driving record should have kept the trucking company from hiring him in the first place. The jury found in favor of Lindsey’s family.

Raytheon/Learjet case

Raytheon retained us when a government contract to supply critical flying test beds to the Federal Aviation Administration went terribly wrong.

The prime subcontractor, Learjet, was to supply Raytheon with aircraft specially configured to accommodate sensitive electronic equipment at a narrow range of temperatures on the ground and in the air. When the Learjet aircraft were delivered, they could not maintain the critical operating temperatures. Raytheon spent millions of dollars solving the problem for the FAA.

We reviewed the history of the program and concluded that Learjet failed to properly perform its contract, and indeed knew prior to contract formation that its aircraft could not perform the mission. That knowledge was hidden from Raytheon.

As a strategy, we decided to prove the breach of contract and fraud through the deposition testimony of key Learjet engineering executives.

As a business accommodation, Raytheon would have settled the case for a portion of its losses. But Learjet would have none of it. When reason failed, the trial team took over. After two weeks of trial in Hunt County, Texas, the jury returned a verdict for 100% of Raytheon’s damages. It also awarded punitive damages of approximately $11 million.