Boeing wants out of Alaska case
Full story: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/134671818_boeing090.html

By Steve Miletich
Seattle Times staff reporter

Boeing has asked a federal judge to remove it as a defendant in wrongful-death suits stemming from the crash of Alaska Airlines Flight 261, contending Alaska's failure to properly maintain the plane was the sole cause of the accident.

If that request is denied, jurors at least should not be allowed to consider potentially huge punitive damages against Boeing, its attorneys argued in a motion filed last week in U.S. District Court in San Francisco.

None of Boeing's actions amounted to intentional conduct that consciously disregarded the rights of others, as is required for punitive damages, the attorneys wrote.

Attorneys for family members suing Boeing and Alaska said they will contest the motion, arguing that whatever Alaska failed to do, Boeing ignored warnings that the jet's design was flawed.

In seeking to be dismissed from the case, Boeing alleges the crash wouldn't have occurred except for Alaska's "repeated failures" to maintain a key component on the plane.

Flight 261 plunged into the Pacific Ocean off Southern California on Jan. 31, 2000, killing all 88 passengers and crew aboard the MD-83 jetliner. The plane crashed as its two pilots prepared for an emergency landing in Los Angeles, en route from Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, to San Francisco and Seattle.

The National Transportation Safety Board in December concluded that the primary cause of the crash was Alaska's failure to properly lubricate the jackscrew assembly, which controls the horizontal stabilizer on the jet's tail. Threads on the jackscrew's nut sheared off, causing the pilots to lose control of the plane.

The board also found that lack of a fail-safe system in the plane, built by McDonnell Douglas before its 1997 merger with Boeing, contributed to the crash.

But it stopped short of recommending that the Federal Aviation Administration order Boeing to redesign the jackscrew assembly.

Jury selection for the trial is to begin in June in 34 remaining wrongful-death suits, with opening statements July 7. The other 54 cases have been settled.

The judge, Charles Breyer, is to hear arguments May 15 on Boeing's motion to be dismissed from the case or freed from punitive damages.

"We will be vigorously contesting it," said Jamie Lebovitz, a Cleveland attorney representing 13 families with active cases. "Over the course of three-plus years, we have established a compelling record of Boeing's misconduct and misdeeds in connection with the design of ... the MD-80 and related models."

Lebovitz said evidence would also show the maintenance program Boeing developed for the plane was "plagued with flaws."

Boeing and Alaska declined comment yesterday on the motion.

Only Boeing faces potential punitive damages in the case. Airlines are protected against such claims under a treaty covering international flights.

But both companies face claims for compensatory damages and potentially costly damages stemming from the pre-crash pain and suffering of passengers.

Boeing's filing represents its most pointed allegations against Alaska, going beyond similar arguments it made to the safety board before the board issued its findings.

Boeing's legal position puts it in a delicate stance with Alaska, a loyal Boeing customer for 50 years. Alaska is considering whether to buy jets from Boeing's rival, Airbus, to replace 40 aging planes over the next decade.

In its filing, Boeing said the Federal Aviation Administration had certified the MD-83's design, and that the jackscrew assembly would not fail unless there were multiple maintenance failures.

Except for Flight 261, Boeing's attorneys said, "there has never been a single failure of the jackscrew assembly, during over 37 years of operation in over 2,200 aircraft by over 75 airlines worldwide flying the equivalent of more than 2 million times around the globe."

Boeing could not have foreseen Alaska's failure to properly maintain the plane, the attorneys wrote.

The filing also cites long-known issues, including Alaska's increase of the interval for checking wear on the jackscrew assembly, and a 1997 decision by Alaska mechanics not to replace the assembly on the plane that later crashed, although the part was near its wear limit.

But it also raises a new allegation: that Alaska failed to examine the jackscrew in October 1999, three months before the crash, when an in-flight problem with the stabilizer's actuator was discovered.

If the assembly had been examined, evidence of serious problems would have been found, Boeing alleges.

In addition to the civil suits, Alaska is the subject of a federal criminal investigation into the crash.

Steve Miletich: 206- 464-3302 or smiletich@seattletimes.com