Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00555/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00555-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 310
Nature of Suit: Airplane Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BARBARA JERPE, et al.,

NO. CIV. S-03-555 LKK/DAD

Plaintiffs,

v. O R D E R

AEROSPATIALE, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

The court is in receipt of plaintiffs’ request for an order

preserving wreckage. As best the court can decipher from

plaintiffs’ one and one half page brief, plaintiffs seek an order

which would prevent Plain Parts, the facility which houses the

helicopter at issue in the underlying suit, from destroying the

helicopter. Plain Parts and Dennis James, the owner of Plain

Parts, are not parties to this case. 

The court must deny plaintiffs’ request. First, plaintiffs

fail to set forth any legal basis for their request. Although

plaintiffs cite to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 27 & 34 in

their proposed order, neither of these rules pertain to plaintiffs’

Case 2:03-cv-00555-LKK -DAD Document 218 Filed 11/08/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

request that Plain Parts not destroy the helicopter. Plaintiffs

also fail to set forth any legal basis for how a court can impose

an order on a non-party. 

Second, even if the court were to construe plaintiffs’ request

as a request for a temporary restraining order, or a motion for

injunctive relief, plaintiffs have failed to set forth good cause

for why this request should be granted. Plain Parts filed an

opposition which clearly states that the helicopter will not be

destroyed so long as rent is paid. Plaintiffs simply fail to

explain why the court must intervene at this point in time. 

For these reasons, plaintiffs’ request is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: November 7, 2006. 

Case 2:03-cv-00555-LKK -DAD Document 218 Filed 11/08/06 Page 2 of 2