This case was last updated from U.S. District Courts on 12/24/2021 at 07:53:44 (UTC).

Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot SA v. The Boeing Company

Case Summary

On October 25, 2021, Polskie Linie Lotnicze LOT S.A (“LOT” or “Plaintiff”), represented by Mirin Ellen Park of Condon & Forsyth LLP, filed a product liability lawsuit against The Boeing Company (“Boeing” or “Defendant”) seeking damages, restitution with pre-judgment interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs for allegedly making material false representations and omissions concerning its 737 MAX aircraft—namely, that the 737 MAX aircraft was safe, airworthy, and was essentially the same as the time-tested 737 Next Generation (“NG”) aircraft. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court in the Western District of Washington. 

In the complaint, Plaintiff alleged that, “Boeing made a calculated decision to rush a re-engined 737 aircraft to market to secure its single-aisle market share, and in doing so, prioritized its bottom line over safety and the rights of its customers. By rushing the 737 MAX to market, Boeing abandoned sound design and engineering practices, withheld safety-critical information from regulators, and deliberately misled its customers including LOT, and the public, concerning the true scope of design changes made to the 737 MAX as compared to previous iterations of Boeing 737 aircraft.”

Plaintiff further alleged that, “Boeing’s deliberate misrepresentations and purposeful omissions caused LOT to believe that the 737 MAX aircraft was airworthy, and that it was to LOT’s economic advantage to acquire 737 MAX aircraft as opposed to Boeing 737 NG aircraft or Airbus A320 NEO aircraft.”

Plaintiff also alleged that, “Boeing’s representations proved to be false, and its purposeful omissions just as costly. The 737 MAX was grounded worldwide for almost two years because it was unsafe, unairworthy, and contrary to Boeing’s representations, distinct from the 737 family of aircraft that preceded it.”

Plaintiff lists out twelve claims for relief. The first claim is for fraudulent misrepresentation. The second claim is for negligent misrepresentation. The third claim is for fraudulent concealment. The fourth claim is for unilateral mistake. The fifth claim is for mutual mistake. The sixth claim is for rescission. The seventh claim is for Boeing’s violation of the implied warranty of merchantability. The eighth claim is for Boeing’s violation of the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose. The ninth claim is for Boeing’s violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act. The tenth claim is for product liability under the Washington Product Liability Act. The eleventh claim is for tortious interference with contracts and the twelfth claim is for tortious interference with business expectancy.

In the prayer for relief, Plaintiff requested the court that the warranties Defendant Boeing provided to Plaintiff LOT and/or any other applicable agreements between LOT and Boeing be rescinded in their entirety. Plaintiff also requested that Plaintiff LOT be afforded all applicable warranties under the Washington Uniform Commercial Code, and that Defendant Boeing pays Plaintiff LOT in an amount no less than $250 million for the lost income, and other categories of pecuniary damages to be proven at trial that LOT has incurred and is continuing to incur. The Plaintiff further requested for attorneys’ fees and costs along with pre-judgment interest for the foregoing.

This case summary may not reflect the current position of the parties to this litigation or the status of this case. Sign up to view the latest case updates and court documents.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    2:21-CV-01449

  • Filing Date:

    10/25/2021

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Product Liability

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

Ricardo S. Martinez

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot SA

Defendant

The Boeing Company

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

Anthony U Battista

Diana Gurfel Shapiro

Evan Kwarta

Mary Dow

Mirin Ellen Park

Defendant Attorneys

Eric B Wolff

Gregory F Miller

Michelle L. Maley

Steve Y Koh

Ulrike Buschbacher Connelly

 

Court Documents

28 #1

Proposed Order

28 #28

Main Document

#27

(#27) ORDER granting Parties' #20 Stipulated MOTION for Extension to Respond to Complaint. Boeing's time to respond to LOT's Complaint shall be extended from11/18/2021, to 12/10/2021. The parties have also agreed to the following briefing schedule for a motion to dismiss: 12/10/2021: Boeing's Motion to Dismiss Due. 1/28/2022: LOT's Opposition Due. 2/11/2022: Boeing's Reply Due. Boeing shall note their Motion to Dismiss for consideration on 2/11/2022. Signed by Judge Ricardo S. Martinez. (SB) (Entered: 12/02/2021)

#26

(#26) AFFIDAVIT of Service of Summons and Complaint on The Boeing Company on 11/1/2021, filed by Plaintiff Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot SA. (Park, Mirin) (Entered: 11/19/2021)

#25

(#25) AFFIDAVIT of Service of Summons and Complaint on The Boeing Company on 11/1/2021, filed by Plaintiff Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot SA. (Park, Mirin) (Entered: 11/19/2021)

#24

(#24) AFFIDAVIT of Service of Summons and Complaint on The Boeing Company on 11/2/2021, filed by Plaintiff Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot SA. (Park, Mirin) (Entered: 11/19/2021)

#23

(#23) AFFIDAVIT of Service of Summons and Complaint on The Boeing Company on 10/28/2021, filed by Plaintiff Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot SA. (Park, Mirin) (Entered: 11/19/2021)

#22

(#22) AFFIDAVIT of Service of Summons and Complaint on The Boeing Company on 11/2/2021, filed by Plaintiff Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot SA. (Park, Mirin) (Entered: 11/19/2021)

#20

(#20) Stipulated MOTION for Extension to Respond to Complaint and [Proposed] Order, filed by Defendant The Boeing Company. Noting Date 11/9/2021, (Connelly, Ulrike) (Entered: 11/09/2021)

#3

(#3) NOTICE of Change of Address/Change of Name of Attorney Mirin Ellen Park. Filed by Plaintiff Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot SA. (Park, Mirin) (Entered: 10/26/2021)

#2

1 #6

Summons Summons - Wilmington

1 #5

Summons Summons - Tumwater

1 #4

Summons Summons - Springfield

1 #3

Summons Summons - Sacramento

1 #2

Summons Summons - Chicago

1 #1

Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet

1 #1

Main Document

26 More Documents Available
View All Documents

 

Docket Entries

  • 12/10/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#28) MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM , filed by Defendant The Boeing Company. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 2/11/2022, (Miller, Gregory) (Entered: 12/10/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/02/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#27) ORDER granting Parties' #20 Stipulated MOTION for Extension to Respond to Complaint. Boeing's time to respond to LOT's Complaint shall be extended from11/18/2021, to 12/10/2021. The parties have also agreed to the following briefing schedule for a motion to dismiss: 12/10/2021: Boeing's Motion to Dismiss Due. 1/28/2022: LOT's Opposition Due. 2/11/2022: Boeing's Reply Due. Boeing shall note their Motion to Dismiss for consideration on 2/11/2022. Signed by Judge Ricardo S. Martinez. (SB) (Entered: 12/02/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/19/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#26) AFFIDAVIT of Service of Summons and Complaint on The Boeing Company on 11/1/2021, filed by Plaintiff Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot SA. (Park, Mirin) (Entered: 11/19/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/19/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#25) AFFIDAVIT of Service of Summons and Complaint on The Boeing Company on 11/1/2021, filed by Plaintiff Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot SA. (Park, Mirin) (Entered: 11/19/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/19/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#24) AFFIDAVIT of Service of Summons and Complaint on The Boeing Company on 11/2/2021, filed by Plaintiff Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot SA. (Park, Mirin) (Entered: 11/19/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/19/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#23) AFFIDAVIT of Service of Summons and Complaint on The Boeing Company on 10/28/2021, filed by Plaintiff Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot SA. (Park, Mirin) (Entered: 11/19/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/19/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#22) AFFIDAVIT of Service of Summons and Complaint on The Boeing Company on 11/2/2021, filed by Plaintiff Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot SA. (Park, Mirin) (Entered: 11/19/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/12/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • DocketREFERRING Joint Status Report deadline and #20 Stipulated MOTION for Extension to Respond to Complaint and [Proposed] Order to: Judge Ricardo S. Martinez per #21 Order Reassigning Case. (GMR) (Entered: 11/12/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/09/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#21) MINUTE ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Ricardo S. Martinez for all further proceedings as related to 2:21-cv-00488-RSM and 2:21-cv-00918-RSM. U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour and Magistrate Judge Theresa L Fricke are no longer assigned to this case. Authorized by Judge Theresa L Fricke. (GMR) (Entered: 11/09/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/09/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#20) Stipulated MOTION for Extension to Respond to Complaint and [Proposed] Order, filed by Defendant The Boeing Company. Noting Date 11/9/2021, (Connelly, Ulrike) (Entered: 11/09/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
13 More Docket Entries
  • 11/02/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#8) APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Anthony U. Battista FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiff Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot SA (Fee Paid) Receipt No. AWAWDC-7317641 (Park, Mirin) (Entered: 11/02/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/02/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#7) NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Ulrike Buschbacher Connelly on behalf of Defendant The Boeing Company. (Connelly, Ulrike) (Entered: 11/02/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/01/2021

  • DocketJoint Status Report deadline NOTED on motion calendar; Noting Date 1/31/2022. (GMR) (Entered: 11/01/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/01/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#6) ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY AND DEPOSITIONS by Judge Theresa L Fricke. (GMR) (Entered: 11/01/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/01/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#5) ORDER REGARDING INITIAL DISCLOSURES, JOINT STATUS REPORT AND EARLY SETTLEMENT. Joint Status Report due by 1/31/2022, FRCP 26(f) Conference Deadline is 1/18/2022, Initial Disclosure Deadline is 1/24/2022, by Judge Theresa L Fricke. (GMR) (Entered: 11/01/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/27/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#4) Summons(es) Electronically Issued as to defendant(s) The Boeing Company. (Attachments: #1 Summons, #2 Summons, #3 Summons, #4 Summons)(RE) (Entered: 10/27/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/27/2021

  • DocketJudge Theresa L Fricke added. (RE) (Entered: 10/27/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/26/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#3) NOTICE of Change of Address/Change of Name of Attorney Mirin Ellen Park. Filed by Plaintiff Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot SA. (Park, Mirin) (Entered: 10/26/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/25/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#2) CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT indicating no Corporate Parents and/or Affiliates. Filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P 7.1. Filed by Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot S.A. (Park, Mirin) (Entered: 10/25/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/25/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#1) COMPLAINT against defendant(s) The Boeing Company with JURY DEMAND (Receipt # AWAWDC-7306594) Attorney Mirin Ellen Park added to party Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot S.A.(pty:pla), filed by Polskie Linie Lotnicze Lot S.A.. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons - Chicago, #3 Summons - Sacramento, #4 Summons - Springfield, #5 Summons - Tumwater, #6 Summons - Wilmington)(Park, Mirin) Modified on 10/27/2021 to edit document titles. (RE) (Entered: 10/25/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less

Why is this public record being published online?

UniCourt uses cookies to improve your online experience, for more information please see our Privacy Policy. By continuing to use this website, you agree to UniCourt’s General Disclaimer, Terms of Service, Cancellation and Refund Policy, Privacy Policy, and Public Records Policy. If you do not agree with these terms, then do not use our website and/or services.