1:23-cv-00413
M.D. Ala.Jul 26, 2024Background
- Adrian Barajas, an Army pilot, was seriously injured in a June 2022 crash of an AH-64E Apache helicopter after tail rotor blade failure, which M1 Support Services had inspected hours prior.
- Barajas and his wife sued M1 Support Services, Boeing-related entities, Ducommun entities, and the United States for alleged negligence in maintenance, inspection, and repair.
- The United States, while denying liability against itself, filed crossclaims against M1 for negligence (property damage) and indemnification if found liable to the Barajases.
- M1 moved to dismiss both crossclaims, relying on an Army AR 15-6 investigation report and alleging the crossclaims lacked factual support and legal basis.
- The court's task was to decide if the United States' crossclaims against M1 survived Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal at the pleading stage.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (U.S.) | Defendant's Argument (M1) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Negligence crossclaim based on helicopter loss | M1 failed maintenance, causing the crash and loss | AR 15-6 report clears M1; crossclaim lacks facts | Denied dismissal; claim plausible |
| Effect of AR 15-6 investigation report | Investigation is only one piece of evidence | Report exonerates M1, so claim should fail | Report not dispositive at pleading |
| Consistency of alternative pleadings by U.S. | Federal rules allow alternative inconsistent claims | U.S. can't claim negligence after denying it before | Alternative pleading allowed |
| Indemnification (common law; active/passive) | U.S. not at fault, alleges M1’s active negligence | No indemnification among joint tortfeasors (AL law) | Exception for active/passive applies |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading standards for motions to dismiss)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (plausibility standard for pleadings)
- Nichols v. Barwick, 792 F.2d 1520 (alternative and inconsistent crossclaim pleading under FED. R. CIV. P. 8)
- United Techs. Corp. v. Mazer, 556 F.3d 1260 (alternative pleading permitted)
- Consol. Pipe & Supply Co. v. Stockham Valves & Fittings, Inc., 365 So. 2d 968 (Ala. 1978) (no right to contribution among joint tortfeasors under Alabama law)