Flight Options, LLC et al v. Local 1108 International Brotherhood of Teamsters et al

Filing 17

Opinion & Order signed by Judge James S. Gwin on 5/6/16. For the reasons set forth in this order, the Court denies the motion to conduct broad expedited discovery, but allows Counter-Defendants to conduct one Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of an In ternational Brotherhood of Teamsters representative with knowledge of how the integrated seniority list was created. Further, the Court orders both parties to file summaries by close of business 5/10/16 not to exceed three pages explaining to this Court how seniority will operate under the integrated seniority list that the Counter-Plaintiffs Teamsters, et al presented to Counter-Defendants Flight Options, et al. (Related Doc. 14 ) (D,MA)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
_____________________________________
FLIGHT OPTIONS, LLC and
FLEXJET, LLC,
Plaintiffs,
v.
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF
TEAMSTERS, LOCAL 1108; INTERNATIONAL
BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS; and
BROTHERHOOD OF
TEAMSTERS, AIRLINE DIVISION,
Defendants.

Case No. 1:16-cv-00732
OPINION & ORDER
[Resolving Doc. 14]

and
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF
TEAMSTERS, AIRLINE DIVISION, and
TEAMSTERS LOCAL UNION 1108,
Counter-Plaintiffs,
v.
FLIGHT OPTIONS, LLC; FLEXJET, LLC;
ONESKY FLIGHT, LLC; and FLIGHT OPTIONS
HOLDINGS I, INC.,
Counter-Defendants.
______________________________________
JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:
On May 3, 2016 Counter-Defendants Flight Options, et. al filed a motion for leave to
conduct expedited discovery and to defer briefing on the union’s motion to dismiss and
responding to the union’s counterclaims.1 On May 6, 2016, Counter-Plaintiffs International
Brotherhood of Teamsters (“Teamsters”) filed opposition.2
For the reasons below, this Court DENIES the motion to conduct broad expedited
discovery but allows Counter-Defendants to conduct one Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of an
International Brotherhood of Teamsters representative with knowledge of how the integrated

1
2

Doc. 14.
Doc. 15.

Case No.16-CV-732
Gwin, J.
seniority list was created. Further, the Court ORDERS both parties to file summaries by close of
business May 10, 2016 not to exceed three pages explaining to this Court how seniority will be
determined under the integrated seniority list that the Counter-Plaintiffs Teamsters et. al
presented to Counter-Defendants Flight Options, et. al.
Discussion
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 provides this Court with wide discretion in governing
discovery processes. Courts may allow parties to conduct expedited discovery in advance of a
Rule 26(f) conference where the moving party establishes “good cause” for such discovery. 3
Here, Counter-Plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss challenges this court’s subject matter
jurisdiction over this case.4 Counter-Defendants Flight Options argue that the Counter Plaintiffs’
challenges to this court’s jurisdiction relate to how the integrated seniority list was selected. This
Court agrees that discovery as to this issue would likely come out eventually in this litigation and
thus would not prejudice the Counter-Plaintiffs. However, this Court finds the scope of the
Counter Defendants’ requested expedited discovery too broad. Thus, this Court will allow the
Counter-Defendants to conduct one expedited Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of a Teamsters
representative to provide discovery related to the jurisdictional challenges made by the
Teamsters.
Further, this Court orders the parties to submit briefing not to exceed three pages on the
issue of how seniority will be determined under the integrated seniority list presented by the
Teamsters. In other words, how is seniority determined between unit employees of the two work
groups?

3

Arista Records, LLC v. Does 1-15, No. 2:07-CCV-450, 2007 WL 5254326, at *2 (S.D. Ohio May 17, 2007).

4

Doc. 8.
2

Case No.16-CV-732
Gwin, J.
Conclusion
For the reasons above, this Court DENIES the motion but allows Counter-Defendants to
conduct one Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of an International Brotherhood of Teamsters
representative with knowledge of how the integrated seniority list was created. Further, the Court
ORDERS both parties to file summaries by close of business May 10, 2016 not to exceed three
pages explaining to this Court how seniority will operate under the integrated seniority list that
the Counter-Plaintiffs Teamsters et. al presented to Counter-Defendants Flight Options, et. al.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 6, 2016

s/
James S. Gwin
JAMES S. GWIN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3