Preview
ee
_-
|
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
Suffolk ss SUPERIOR COURT
Docket No.: 2 4-(l C40 -
Kel i Excellus, [thors
/Tho kx Busch/
| Plaintiffs Keesti Vu Kone OW ED
i
vs. CA No:
)
JetBlue Airways Corporation )
Defendant )
at)
I
CONTEMPT COMPLAINT AND REQUEST FOR A SHORT ORDER OF NOTICE FOR
THIS COMPLAINT AND ATTENDANT MOTIONS FOR DISCOVERY AND
APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL PROCESS SERVER ther sk
I Kriss Vu sme on eusr
i
Per Massachusetts Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 65.3, the PlaintiffsKelly Excellus requests
@
that the Court initiate a civil contempt proceeding against Defendant Jet Blue Airways Corporation.
1. Following a hearing and an order, on February 6, 2023, a Final Judgment entered in the
consolidated disputes in: Kelly Excellus v. Jet Blue Airways Corporation docketed as
u2284CV01110, Kristi Vuksanovich v. Jet Blue Airways Corporation docketed as
2284CV01111 and Thorsten Bush v. Jet Blue Airways Corporation docket as
2284CV01112
In relevant part that Final Order, attached hereto as Exhibit 2, stated:
1
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED THAT: '1
JetBlue shall serve the following documents responsive to the dociments to this
subpoena: I
1) Documents relating to each of the fume events at issue (The subposha specifically
references log book entries, “Interruption” and Irregularity” reports, dispateh
printouts, and “FOQUA data.”)
2) Documents relating to any fume event that occurred on each ofthe aigplanes on which
the fume events at issue occurred, from January 1, 2015, to present.!
3) Documents relating to any maintenance related to any fume evént that occurred on0
any of the airplanes atissue, from January1, 2015, to Present. | |
|
=
a
—
The Defendant has refused to comply with that Final Judgment.
4l The Plaintiffs undertook enforcement actions and requested that the Court find the Defendant
in contempt for failure to comply with Court Orders.
5 To date, the Defendant has refused to attest that it satisfied its obligations pursuant to the
February 6, 2023, Final Order.
After ruling in December regarding compliance with the order, for procedural reasons, on
Friday, April 19, 2024, Judge Connolley issued an order, attached hereto as Exhibit 1,
vacating. her previous rulings and granting Plaintiff leave to file a new action for civil
{i contempt to enforce the Court’s February 16, 2023, order.
The Plain F&
Thus, Ms-Excelins brings the instant contempt action and reserves her gith to file civil suit
as appropriate.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff requests that the Court:
Issue a Summons pursuant to Civil Rule 65.3 directing the parties appear before the Court
on April 29, 2024 at 9:30 a.m. for the purpose of scheduling a trial, considering whether
the filing of an answer is necessary, holding a hearing on the merits of the complaint, or
considering such other matters or performing such other acts as the court may deem
appropriate.
IL Issue appropriate injunctive, declaratory and/or other equitable relief including economic
damages, attorneys fees & costs, emotional distress damages, punitive damages
(including double and/or treble damages), and/or other similar relief;
im, Such other relief as this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate under the
circumstances.
Dated: April 24, 2024 Respectfully submitted,
The
Petitioner— Pla Ate &
|I By her attorney,
l /s/ Jamie Goodwin
Jamie Goodwin
Duddy Goodwin & Pollard
446 Main Street, 1601
Worcester, MA 01608
ig@dgpfirm.com
pe
a
i “hol
wee \
I COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS i;
| SUFFOLK, SS. SUPERIOR coury, DIVISION
C.A. NO. 2284CV01110 D
KELLY EXCELLUS
Vv.
|
| JET BLUE AIRWAYS CORPORATION
lI
I JUDGMENT
This matter came on before the: Cout, Jackie Cowin, Justice, presiding, on, Petitioner’s
| Motion to Compel JetBlue’s compliance with a Subpoena issued by the Dé hent of Industrial
; Accidents, and after hearing on Motion to Compel and hearing on Motion fo Reponsider
Re Order
on Petitioner’s Motion to Compel: 1I
i '
:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED THAT: 4
't
JetBlue shall serve the following documents responsive to the dociments to this
subpoena: i,
1) Documents relating to each of the fume events at issue (The subpoéna specifically
references log book entries, “Interruption” and Irregularity” reorts, dispatch
printouts, and “FOQUA data.”)
2) Documents relating to any fume event that occurred on each of ‘the airplanes on which
the fume events at issue occurred, from January 1, 2015, topresent. } }
3) Documents relating to any maintenance related to any fume event that occurred on0
any of the airplanes atissue, from January1, 2015, to present. |
4
Dated this 6 day of February 2023
John E. Powers, II
Acting Clerk of Courts
ws .
Margaret Buckley
"
Assistant Clerk
BB
Feed s
fh ENTERED-ON
MART TO THE PROVES!
NOTICE GEND TO PART 7
3
TOT.
ON.
VEEQUS OF MASS, RCN P Tie)AS FOLQUG,« 2A
a
-4
-
= ~
ii
en ys
gag ae
ad? Ee
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
a
SUFFOLK, ss. SUPERIOR COURT
CONSOLIDATED
CIVIL ACTIONS
No.'2284CV01110
2284CVO1111 -
2284CV01112
INRE KELLY EXCELLUS
IN RE KRISTI VUKSANOVICH
INRE THORNT ‘ON BUSCH
i [consolidated actions] Plaintiffs
i vs.
JET BLUE AIRWA YS CORP.
| Defendant
DECISION AND ORDER TO RECONSIDER AND VACATE COURT'S DECEMBER 5,
023 ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS' RENEWED CONSOLIDATED MOTION TO
ENFORCE PROTECTIVE ORDERS AND REQUEST THAT A COMPLAINT FO!
CONTEMPT ISSUE wrt ASSOCIATED FEES AND COSTS
On December 5, 2023 (December Order”) the court entered an order on Plaintiffs’
Renewed Motion to Enforce Protective Orders.! The December Order was intended compel the
Defendant to either satisfy thé court that the Defendant had produced all responsive documents,
asDefendant contended, or, ifnot, asPlaintfs mainiained, then to compel the Defendant to
comply with a previous court Order in the consolidated cases, dated November 14, 2022 (Cowin,
J)\(paper #14), that had ordered the Defendant to produced certain documents within thirty (30)
|
|
"The Order was dated December 5, 2024, andit appeared on the docket on Decomber 7, 2023, as a margin
endorsement on paper number 35, The order states: “Upon review and in consideration of the contentious nature of
this protracted discovery the court now orders as follows: (1) JetBluc’s gericral courisel, within 30 days file an
affidavit with this court stating if truc that there are no responsive documents within the defendant's care custody or
control; if there are responsive documents they shall be produced within 30 days. Failure to comply with this order
may subject the defendant to rule 37 sanctions (discovery) up to and including having judgment entered against the
defendant on the issue of liability; (2) plaintiffs shall provide the court with a copy of the protective order it is
referencing and (3) the court shall set this down (for arule 16 status hearing that shall be in person hearing, So,
ordered.
4
i
4
i
=
days of that Order,? The December Order sought to bring thematter, to aclose. However, what
|I was not then known to the court was the following procedural events between the time of the
| November 14, 2022, Order and the December Order which were:
\,
i 1. that a final judgment had been entered in all three cases on February 16,2023. That
Judgement ordered Jet Blue to scrve responsive documents to the Department of
Industrial Accidents (DIA) subpoena for three categories of documents that
concerned a 5-year period for certain referenced airplanes. (Sc docket entry number
28 in 2284cv01110);
On February 17, 2023, theDefendant filed a notice of Appeal from the final
judgment;
On March 21, 2023, theParties docketed a pleading entitled: Joint Stipulation and
Agreement (paper number 31) This document purports to be an agreement to resolve
the matter whereby the Defendant shall produce the records subject to the parties’
protective agreement. The Defendant agrees to dismiss its appeal and pay Plaintiff's
counsel in satisfaction of Judge Cowan’s award of R. 37 fees and costs related to the
November 14, 2022, motion. In that stipulation the Plaintiff states that: “Tujpon
receipt of the documents and fees Petitioner will execute and file a Satisfaction of
Judgment in the above action.
4. Plaintiff has not filed any Satisfaction of Judgment.
-
2 This action arise in the context of a pending workers compensation matter pending before the Department of
industrial accidents (DIA) matter And the plaintiffs brought the action in the Superior Court to enforce
that
subpoena. After several hearings and orders from judge Cowan judge Cowan issued her final order
and assessed fees
and costs and connection with her order of November 14/20/22pursuant to a subpoena that had been issued
out of
the industrial accident board.
~~ _-
— —
a.
In light of the above procedural history, the court has now reconsidered its December 2023 Order
—
because that Order was issued under amisimpression that the court was enforcing the November
14, 2022, Order; it was not then aware that a final judgment had already entered in each matter.
Plaintiffs needed to file a new action to enforce the judgment or seek contempt or whatever other
remedy they were seeking. The Defendant, whose abysmal conduct in failing to make even the
barest showing of good faith compliance with the court’s previous orders and whose delay and
foot-dragging has led the parties and the court into this quagmire, is admittedly prejudiced by its
dismissal of itsappeal in reliance on Plaintiff filing a “satisfaction of Judgment” that has never
been filed. Defendant has been left without an avenue to seck appellate review from any of the
court’s interim orders. While the court is not satisfied that the Defendant has complied, in good
faith, with any of its previous orders, the court recognizes that sanctioning Defendant or finding
Defendant in contempt in these dismissed cases after final judgment has entered will add
to the
procedural problem and compound aprior mistake. However, the court has expressed to the
Defendant that it’s casual attitude io court orders time and time again is frustrating to both
Plaintiffand the court. Additionally, the Defendant's inexcusable conduct has caused needless
expense and is an utter waste of time all because JetBluc Corp cannot or will not either fully
comply or certify that it has complied with its production obligation, In light of the foregoing, the
court expects there will be a next chapter to this'saga.
The messy procedural posture constrains the actions that the court can now take in the
three consolidated action to enforce its December 5, 2023, Order. This decision to reconsider
and vacate its prior Order is based solely on the fact that once judgment entered no new
pleadings should have been filed in these actions, The court shall now reconsider and VACATE
ae
—. a
its Order of December 5, 2023. The Plaintiffs may file a new action to seek civil
- contempt or
“| breach of contract or to enforce its judgment or to bring any other claim in a new action.
ORDER
‘The court has reconsidered its December 5, 2023, Order and now VACATE
S, that Order
in all three consolidated cascs. Final Judgment has been entered in cach of
these cases on
February 16, 2023. Plaintiff must file a new action if they wish to scck civil contempt
, breach of
contract or to enforce the February 16, 2023, judgment.
SO Ordered:
1 fg LAA}
Ze
is
ROSEMA: ONNOLLY
Associate / tice of the Supe: art
DATE: APRIL 19, 2024
Preview
ee _- | COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Suffolk ss SUPERIOR COURT Docket No.: 2 4-(l C40 - Kel i Excellus, [thors /Tho kx Busch/ | Plaintiffs Keesti Vu Kone OW ED i vs. CA No: ) JetBlue Airways Corporation ) Defendant ) at) I CONTEMPT COMPLAINT AND REQUEST FOR A SHORT ORDER OF NOTICE FOR THIS COMPLAINT AND ATTENDANT MOTIONS FOR DISCOVERY AND APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL PROCESS SERVER ther sk I Kriss Vu sme on eusr i Per Massachusetts Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 65.3, the PlaintiffsKelly Excellus requests @ that the Court initiate a civil contempt proceeding against Defendant Jet Blue Airways Corporation. 1. Following a hearing and an order, on February 6, 2023, a Final Judgment entered in the consolidated disputes in: Kelly Excellus v. Jet Blue Airways Corporation docketed as u2284CV01110, Kristi Vuksanovich v. Jet Blue Airways Corporation docketed as 2284CV01111 and Thorsten Bush v. Jet Blue Airways Corporation docket as 2284CV01112 In relevant part that Final Order, attached hereto as Exhibit 2, stated: 1 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED THAT: '1 JetBlue shall serve the following documents responsive to the dociments to this subpoena: I 1) Documents relating to each of the fume events at issue (The subposha specifically references log book entries, “Interruption” and Irregularity” reports, dispateh printouts, and “FOQUA data.”) 2) Documents relating to any fume event that occurred on each ofthe aigplanes on which the fume events at issue occurred, from January 1, 2015, to present.! 3) Documents relating to any maintenance related to any fume evént that occurred on0 any of the airplanes atissue, from January1, 2015, to Present. | | | = a — The Defendant has refused to comply with that Final Judgment. 4l The Plaintiffs undertook enforcement actions and requested that the Court find the Defendant in contempt for failure to comply with Court Orders. 5 To date, the Defendant has refused to attest that it satisfied its obligations pursuant to the February 6, 2023, Final Order. After ruling in December regarding compliance with the order, for procedural reasons, on Friday, April 19, 2024, Judge Connolley issued an order, attached hereto as Exhibit 1, vacating. her previous rulings and granting Plaintiff leave to file a new action for civil {i contempt to enforce the Court’s February 16, 2023, order. The Plain F& Thus, Ms-Excelins brings the instant contempt action and reserves her gith to file civil suit as appropriate. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff requests that the Court: Issue a Summons pursuant to Civil Rule 65.3 directing the parties appear before the Court on April 29, 2024 at 9:30 a.m. for the purpose of scheduling a trial, considering whether the filing of an answer is necessary, holding a hearing on the merits of the complaint, or considering such other matters or performing such other acts as the court may deem appropriate. IL Issue appropriate injunctive, declaratory and/or other equitable relief including economic damages, attorneys fees & costs, emotional distress damages, punitive damages (including double and/or treble damages), and/or other similar relief; im, Such other relief as this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate under the circumstances. Dated: April 24, 2024 Respectfully submitted, The Petitioner— Pla Ate & |I By her attorney, l /s/ Jamie Goodwin Jamie Goodwin Duddy Goodwin & Pollard 446 Main Street, 1601 Worcester, MA 01608 ig@dgpfirm.com pe a i “hol wee \ I COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS i; | SUFFOLK, SS. SUPERIOR coury, DIVISION C.A. NO. 2284CV01110 D KELLY EXCELLUS Vv. | | JET BLUE AIRWAYS CORPORATION lI I JUDGMENT This matter came on before the: Cout, Jackie Cowin, Justice, presiding, on, Petitioner’s | Motion to Compel JetBlue’s compliance with a Subpoena issued by the Dé hent of Industrial ; Accidents, and after hearing on Motion to Compel and hearing on Motion fo Reponsider Re Order on Petitioner’s Motion to Compel: 1I i ' : IT IS HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED THAT: 4 't JetBlue shall serve the following documents responsive to the dociments to this subpoena: i, 1) Documents relating to each of the fume events at issue (The subpoéna specifically references log book entries, “Interruption” and Irregularity” reorts, dispatch printouts, and “FOQUA data.”) 2) Documents relating to any fume event that occurred on each of ‘the airplanes on which the fume events at issue occurred, from January 1, 2015, topresent. } } 3) Documents relating to any maintenance related to any fume event that occurred on0 any of the airplanes atissue, from January1, 2015, to present. | 4 Dated this 6 day of February 2023 John E. Powers, II Acting Clerk of Courts ws . Margaret Buckley " Assistant Clerk BB Feed s fh ENTERED-ON MART TO THE PROVES! NOTICE GEND TO PART 7 3 TOT. ON. VEEQUS OF MASS, RCN P Tie)AS FOLQUG,« 2A a -4 - = ~ ii en ys gag ae ad? Ee COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS a SUFFOLK, ss. SUPERIOR COURT CONSOLIDATED CIVIL ACTIONS No.'2284CV01110 2284CVO1111 - 2284CV01112 INRE KELLY EXCELLUS IN RE KRISTI VUKSANOVICH INRE THORNT ‘ON BUSCH i [consolidated actions] Plaintiffs i vs. JET BLUE AIRWA YS CORP. | Defendant DECISION AND ORDER TO RECONSIDER AND VACATE COURT'S DECEMBER 5, 023 ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS' RENEWED CONSOLIDATED MOTION TO ENFORCE PROTECTIVE ORDERS AND REQUEST THAT A COMPLAINT FO! CONTEMPT ISSUE wrt ASSOCIATED FEES AND COSTS On December 5, 2023 (December Order”) the court entered an order on Plaintiffs’ Renewed Motion to Enforce Protective Orders.! The December Order was intended compel the Defendant to either satisfy thé court that the Defendant had produced all responsive documents, asDefendant contended, or, ifnot, asPlaintfs mainiained, then to compel the Defendant to comply with a previous court Order in the consolidated cases, dated November 14, 2022 (Cowin, J)\(paper #14), that had ordered the Defendant to produced certain documents within thirty (30) | | "The Order was dated December 5, 2024, andit appeared on the docket on Decomber 7, 2023, as a margin endorsement on paper number 35, The order states: “Upon review and in consideration of the contentious nature of this protracted discovery the court now orders as follows: (1) JetBluc’s gericral courisel, within 30 days file an affidavit with this court stating if truc that there are no responsive documents within the defendant's care custody or control; if there are responsive documents they shall be produced within 30 days. Failure to comply with this order may subject the defendant to rule 37 sanctions (discovery) up to and including having judgment entered against the defendant on the issue of liability; (2) plaintiffs shall provide the court with a copy of the protective order it is referencing and (3) the court shall set this down (for arule 16 status hearing that shall be in person hearing, So, ordered. 4 i 4 i = days of that Order,? The December Order sought to bring thematter, to aclose. However, what |I was not then known to the court was the following procedural events between the time of the | November 14, 2022, Order and the December Order which were: \, i 1. that a final judgment had been entered in all three cases on February 16,2023. That Judgement ordered Jet Blue to scrve responsive documents to the Department of Industrial Accidents (DIA) subpoena for three categories of documents that concerned a 5-year period for certain referenced airplanes. (Sc docket entry number 28 in 2284cv01110); On February 17, 2023, theDefendant filed a notice of Appeal from the final judgment; On March 21, 2023, theParties docketed a pleading entitled: Joint Stipulation and Agreement (paper number 31) This document purports to be an agreement to resolve the matter whereby the Defendant shall produce the records subject to the parties’ protective agreement. The Defendant agrees to dismiss its appeal and pay Plaintiff's counsel in satisfaction of Judge Cowan’s award of R. 37 fees and costs related to the November 14, 2022, motion. In that stipulation the Plaintiff states that: “Tujpon receipt of the documents and fees Petitioner will execute and file a Satisfaction of Judgment in the above action. 4. Plaintiff has not filed any Satisfaction of Judgment. - 2 This action arise in the context of a pending workers compensation matter pending before the Department of industrial accidents (DIA) matter And the plaintiffs brought the action in the Superior Court to enforce that subpoena. After several hearings and orders from judge Cowan judge Cowan issued her final order and assessed fees and costs and connection with her order of November 14/20/22pursuant to a subpoena that had been issued out of the industrial accident board. ~~ _- — — a. In light of the above procedural history, the court has now reconsidered its December 2023 Order — because that Order was issued under amisimpression that the court was enforcing the November 14, 2022, Order; it was not then aware that a final judgment had already entered in each matter. Plaintiffs needed to file a new action to enforce the judgment or seek contempt or whatever other remedy they were seeking. The Defendant, whose abysmal conduct in failing to make even the barest showing of good faith compliance with the court’s previous orders and whose delay and foot-dragging has led the parties and the court into this quagmire, is admittedly prejudiced by its dismissal of itsappeal in reliance on Plaintiff filing a “satisfaction of Judgment” that has never been filed. Defendant has been left without an avenue to seck appellate review from any of the court’s interim orders. While the court is not satisfied that the Defendant has complied, in good faith, with any of its previous orders, the court recognizes that sanctioning Defendant or finding Defendant in contempt in these dismissed cases after final judgment has entered will add to the procedural problem and compound aprior mistake. However, the court has expressed to the Defendant that it’s casual attitude io court orders time and time again is frustrating to both Plaintiffand the court. Additionally, the Defendant's inexcusable conduct has caused needless expense and is an utter waste of time all because JetBluc Corp cannot or will not either fully comply or certify that it has complied with its production obligation, In light of the foregoing, the court expects there will be a next chapter to this'saga. The messy procedural posture constrains the actions that the court can now take in the three consolidated action to enforce its December 5, 2023, Order. This decision to reconsider and vacate its prior Order is based solely on the fact that once judgment entered no new pleadings should have been filed in these actions, The court shall now reconsider and VACATE ae —. a its Order of December 5, 2023. The Plaintiffs may file a new action to seek civil - contempt or “| breach of contract or to enforce its judgment or to bring any other claim in a new action. ORDER ‘The court has reconsidered its December 5, 2023, Order and now VACATE S, that Order in all three consolidated cascs. Final Judgment has been entered in cach of these cases on February 16, 2023. Plaintiff must file a new action if they wish to scck civil contempt , breach of contract or to enforce the February 16, 2023, judgment. SO Ordered: 1 fg LAA} Ze is ROSEMA: ONNOLLY Associate / tice of the Supe: art DATE: APRIL 19, 2024