Abadi v. American Airlines Inc.
- Lewis Liman
- 1:23-cv-04033
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Abadi v. American Airlines, Judge Liman ordered Abadi to say whether he would withdraw or pursue his alternative-service motion.
Aaron Abadi and the three airlines named in his alternative-service motion; the order also addressed the status of the appearing defendants, the non-appearing defendants, and the Federal Government Defendants.
What happened
In Abadi v. American Airlines Inc., the court said a stipulation and an earlier order had dismissed the claims against the appearing defendants, except the Federal Government Defendants. Claims involving three airlines—Air China Limited, China Southern Airlines Company Limited, and Sun Country, Inc. doing business as Sun Country Airlines—remained connected to those earlier claims.
The court said it was prepared to decide Abadi’s request to use an alternative method of serving those three airlines. It also explained that the claims were closely connected, which likely prevented the court from entering a final judgment on only the claims already dismissed.
The court ordered Abadi to file a letter by June 14, 2024, stating whether he withdrew the alternative-service motion. If he withdrew it, he also had to say whether he agreed to dismiss the non-appearing defendants without prejudice or instead wanted the court to decide the motion. The order was issued by Judge Lewis J. Liman.
The detailed version
- Abadi v. American Airlines Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-04033
- Lewis Liman
- May 31, 2024
Background
The court stated that it had signed a stipulation of dismissal. Together with the court’s March 29, 2024 Opinion and Order, the stipulation addressed and resulted in dismissal of all claims against the appearing defendants, except the Federal Government Defendants. The opinion does not provide the full terms of the earlier order or stipulation.
The remaining matter identified in this order was Aaron Abadi’s motion for alternative service against Air China Limited, China Southern Airlines Company Limited, and Sun Country, Inc. doing business as Sun Country Airlines. Alternative service is service of legal papers by a method other than the usual method.
Court’s reasoning
The court found that the claims against the three airlines were “inextricably intertwined”—closely connected—with the claims against the other airlines. Because of that connection, the court said it was likely unable to enter a partial final judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) for the claims dismissed in the March 29 order. Rule 54(b) allows a court to enter final judgment on fewer than all claims or parties only when it expressly finds that there is no just reason to delay. The court cited the relationship between the claims as a reason not to make that certification while related issues remained unresolved.
Order
The court stated that it was prepared to address Abadi’s alternative-service motion if he wished to continue pursuing it. It ordered Abadi, by June 14, 2024, to file a letter stating whether he withdrew the motion. If he withdrew it, he also had to state whether he consented to dismissal of the non-appearing defendants without prejudice or instead wanted the court to rule on the alternative-service motion.
This order did not itself state that the court granted or denied the alternative-service motion. It also did not itself enter the requested partial final judgment.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.