Amicus Briefs

Download the Brief

Issue Presented 

Whether the Ninth Circuit should grant a petition for rehearing en banc to address the question of specific personal jurisdiction over British company doing business in Idaho.

Factual Summary

The tragedy of Lion Air Flight JT 610 is etched in the memory of the families who lost their loved ones that fateful day. They sought justice, not just for their unimaginable grief, but to ensure that no other families would have to endure similar pain. Their lawsuit aimed squarely at Boeing, the manufacturer responsible for the aircraft’s defective design that led to the catastrophic crash, killing all on board. As the families pursued accountability, they ran into an unexpected obstacle: Boeing shielded critical documents from discovery under the Patient Safety Work Product Privilege.

The District Court for the Northern District of Illinois sided with Boeing, effectively closing the door to vital evidence the families believed held the key to proving Boeing's negligence.¹ The families then pleaded with the Seventh Circuit to reverse this ruling, asserting that these documents are crucial in exposing the full extent of Boeing’s dangerous design flaws and ensuring justice is served for the victims of this horrific event, to no avail.² 

AAJ’s Position

AAJ filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the families, arguing that the Patient Safety Work Product Privilege should not be a shield for corporations like Boeing to avoid accountability for preventable disasters. This privilege was never intended to conceal evidence of gross negligence and defective products, especially when lives are at stake. AAJ emphasizes that transparency is vital to prevent future tragedies, and that justice cannot be served when critical evidence is withheld. AAJ stresses that the courts must prioritize the rights of victims and their families over corporate interests in cases involving mass tragedy.

Outcome: Adverse

The Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of the case under the doctrine of forum non conveniens, holding that Indonesia was the appropriate forum for the litigation.³ Plaintiffs' arguments that U.S. courts should hear the case due to Boeing's involvement were rejected, as the court found that Indonesian courts provided an adequate alternative forum. The Seventh Circuit denied Plaintiffs’ petition for rehearing en banc on September 10, 2024.

Citations

Brief: Brief of Amicus Curiae American Association for Justice in Support of Plaintiffs-Appellants and Reversal, In re Lion Air Flight JT 610 Crash, Nos. 23-2358, 23-2359 (August 28, 2023).

Opinion: In re Lion Air Flight JT 610 Crash, 110 F.4th 1007 (7th Cir. 2024).

^[1] In re Lion Air Flight JT 610 Crash, No. 18 C 07686, 2023 WL 3653218 (N.D. Ill. May 25, 2023).

^[2] In re Lion Air Flight JT 610 Crash, 110 F.4th 1007 (7th Cir. 2024).

^[3] In re Lion Air Flight JT 610 Crash, 110 F.4th 1007 (7th Cir. 2024) (reasoning that Indonesia had a stronger connection to the crash, the victims, and the evidence, making it a more suitable venue for the case).