With 'Soul of the Company Now at Stake,' What Can Boeing's Legal Department Do to Stem the Grounding Fallout?
Boeing's in-house lawyers can help minimize the fallout from the 737 Max fleet grounding incident by taking the lead on figuring out what happened, preparing for potential litigation and reviewing internal and external communications, former general counsel told Corporate Counsel.
March 14, 2019 at 05:57 PM
4 minute read
The Boeing Co.'s legal department will be kept busy as the aerospace giant reels from President Donald Trump's decision to ground its 737 Max fleet. According to former general counsel, Boeing's in-house lawyers can help minimize the fallout by taking the lead on figuring out what happened, preparing for potential litigation, and reviewing internal and external communications.
Ben Heineman, former GC and senior vice president at General Electric Co., said in an email that Boeing's legal department must build on its own internal analyses and the views of experts both inside and outside the company to identify both problems and solutions that will pass regulatory and public muster so the Max jets can fly again—a process that may involve additional in-flight, not just simulator, testing.
“The candor and credibility of Boeing's assessment is key even if it entails admission of defects in design or manufacture or instruction. The soul of the company is now at stake,” he wrote. “Its honest remediation of key issues—if necessary—is more important than any liability which may result from candor. A straight-up communication process—both inside and outside the company—is an essential companion to actual remediation.”
In what critics decried as a too-slow response, the Federal Aviation Administration on Wednesday grounded all of Boeing's 737 Max jets. By that time, several other countries already had done so following a Sunday fatal Ethiopian Airlines crash involving a 737 Max jet—the second crash in nearly six months.
Boeing said it supported the decision, noting in a statement that “out of an abundance of caution and in order to reassure the flying public of the aircraft's safety [we] recommend to the FAA the temporary suspension of operations of the entire global fleet of 371 737 MAX aircraft.”
Boeing stands out among corporate legal departments in that its ranks, as of December 2017, included 11 former U.S. Supreme Court clerks and is headed since 2006 by executive vice president and GC J. Michael Luttig, a former U.S. Chief Justice Warren Burger law clerk, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit judge and himself once a high court short-lister.
A Boeing representative did not respond to an email seeking comment from Luttig or other members of the in-house legal team.
Sterling Miller, former GC at Travelocity and now senior counsel at the law firm Hilgers Graben, said Boeing in-house lawyers should be taking the lead on the investigative work such as finding out what's being alleged and reviewing on-board internal documents, for example.
Miller said when a company is in damage control mode, as Boeing is now, in-house lawyers can minimize the threat of messy litigation. It's important, he added, that they control both internal and external communications—reviewing the latter beforehand and with the former, advising employees against using phrasing or word choice in their emails that could later haunt the company.
“It's the lawyers that are typically in these situations starting to tell everyone, 'We've got to be smart and thoughtful about what we're writing,'” he said. “We don't want people accepting blame.”
Miller says Boeing's lawyers also should be asking, “Who could be suing us for this? Does someone owe me?”
Indeed, Boeing already faces lawsuits from passengers, particularly since eight of them on the Ethiopian Air flight were Americans. But airlines also could bring legal actions over revenue losses incurred due to the grounding, according to lawyers who specialize in aviation.
Representatives from American Airlines, Southwest Airlines Co. and United Airlines Inc.—the U.S. companies that fly Boeing 737 Max jets—either did not respond to or declined to comment on requests seeking information about the airlines' legal departments' role in the grounding incident.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGC Who Helped Fanatics Pull Off Growth Tear Joins Acquisitive Provider of Live Event Logistics
Norfolk Southern Replaces Fired CLO With Fast-Rising Internal Candidate
Norfolk Southern Fires Legal Chief and CEO, Saying They Had Inappropriate Relationship
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250