Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04292/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04292-16/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination

---

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

27

28

MOTION IN LIMINE RE: REQUEST FOR

TELEVIDEO WITNESS TESTIMONY

CASE NO C 05-04292 SI

GREGORY S. REDMOND, ESQ. (SBN 158135)

430 Railroad Avenue

Pittsburg, CA 94565

Telephone: 925.427.9023

Facsimile: 925.427.3020

Attorney for Plaintiff

GRETA ANDERSON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GRETA L. ANDERSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. C 05-04292 SI

MOTION IN LIMINE TO ALLOW TRIAL

WITNESS TO APPEAR VIA LIVE

TELEVIDEO OR TWO-WAY TELEPHONE

Trial Date: March 3, 2008

Courtroom: 10

Judge: Hon. Susan Illston

Plaintiff, Greta Anderson, moves the Court for a Motion in Limine to Allow Trial Witness to

Appear Via Live Televideo. Plaintiff intends to call Leona Rowe (“Rowe”), a resident of the State

of Maryland, to testify at trial. Rowe resides in Maryland and is outside of this Court’s subpoena

power. Rowe is a Paramedic EMS Training Officer with the State of Maryland, Maryland Institute

for Emergency Medical Services Systems. She was a passenger on a flight on August 20, 2003, (one

of the legs of Flight Sequence 25666) wherein Anderson assisted her in tending to a medical

emergency on that flight involving a pregnant passenger. Rowe is willing to appear as a witness via

live televideo.

On August 21, 2003, American Airlines (“AA”) removed Plaintiff, flight attendant Greta

Anderson, from the last leg of Flight Sequence 25666 (“Flight Sequence”) due to her alleged

“bizarre” and “erratic” behavior on the Flight Sequence—a series of four flights—as alleged by

other flight crew members. On August 26, 2003, AA issued Anderson an order under threat of

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 72 Filed 01/29/2008 Page 1 of 4 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 75 Filed 03/05/08 Page 1 of 4
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

27

28

MOTION IN LIMINE RE: REQUEST FOR

TELEVIDEO WITNESS TESTIMONY

CASE NO C 05-04292 SI

2.

termination to submit to a fitness-for-duty examination--the fifth (5) such examination in the span of

eight (8) years.1

On the next to the last leg of Flight Sequence (Ft. Myers, Florida to Dallas), Anderson claims

Captain Hoffman raised his fist at her and yelled at her to “get back” to work before take-off of that

flight.2

 Sometime during that flight, Captain Hoffman informed American Airlines’ flight services

in Dallas that he was going to remove Anderson from the Flight Sequence. Upon landing in Dallas,

American Airlines’ flight services escorted Anderson to a room and demanded that she provide

American Airlines with a statement of her “negative” behavior on the Flight Sequence. Captain

Hoffman initially told AA that he removed Anderson because she had been in conflict with

passengers on each leg of the Flight Sequence. On or after August 29, 2003, just a few days after

submitting a written report to AA, Captain Hoffman told the Ft. Myers police that the reason he

removed Anderson was because she had threatened to sue him.

On August 26, 2003, without having statement from Anderson, American Airlines ordered

Anderson to submit to her fifth fitness-for-duty examination in the span of eight years based at least

in part based on her alleged “bizarre” and “erratic” behavior on the Flight Sequence.3

Anderson’s behavior on the Flight Sequence was appropriate and professional. Anderson

obtained percipient witness passenger statements evidencing her highly professional behavior on the

Flight Sequence including statements from another American Airlines’ pilot deadheading on a flight

and Leona Rowe. On August 20, 2003, Rowe was a passenger on American Airlines flight 450 from

Fresno to Dallas--a leg of Flight Sequence 25666. During the flight, a pregnant passenger suffered

a medical emergency. Responding to the emergency, Anderson called for passenger medical

assistance. Two physicians and Rowe, a paramedic, responded to the call. Anderson assisted Rowe

and the physicians with treating the passenger until the plane landed. In a letter dated October 17,

 

1 Although the decision was made on August 26, 2003, AA did not advise Anderson until September 4, 2003. Instead,

on September 4, 2003, AA made Anderson attend a 31R hearing wherein she was falsely told before the meeting that no

decision had been made. At the end of the meeting, AA advised Anderson that she was required to attend the Aabilities

Clinic and that she was “psychologically” unfit for duty.

2 On August 29, 2003, Anderson filed a police report with the Ft. Myers police. 3 In 1995, AA’s HR representative Jack Upchurch decided, without AA medical approval, to “make” Anderson submit

to a fitness-for-duty examination. However, Plaintiff agreed to voluntarily submit to the examination.

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 72 Filed 01/29/2008 Page 2 of 4 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 75 Filed 03/05/08 Page 2 of 4
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

27

28

MOTION IN LIMINE RE: REQUEST FOR

TELEVIDEO WITNESS TESTIMONY

CASE NO C 05-04292 SI

3.

2003, to American Airlines, Rowe stated in part that:

Ms. Anderson assisted in every aspect of this incident. She got whatever we requestedincluding the medical kit, and communicated about the situation with the cockpit. She made sure to

come to our seats after we settled things down, got our names, addresses, & business cards, and

expressed gratitude on behalf of the airline for our assistance. I feel she acted in a very caring and

professional manner.

Rowe’s statement that Anderson handled an in-flight emergency in a caring and professional

manner—just one day before she was removed from her duty on August 21, 20034

--is relevant as to

whether Anderson performed the essential functions of her job and whether American Airlines

removed Anderson due to perceived mental disability. In October 2003, Anderson provided

American Airlines with a copy of Rowe’s letter and produced this letter to American Airlines in this

action.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 43(a) permits presentation of testimony in open court by

contemporaneous transmission from a different location for good cause shown in compelling

circumstances. Good cause is shown where the witness resides outside of the jurisdictional limits of

the Court and it would be difficult and costly to have her testify in person at trial. Sussel v. Wynne,

2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72774. (“The Court finds that good cause has been shown in compelling

circumstances here because the witness is in Alabama and it would be difficult and costly to have

him testify in person at the pretrial conference.”).

Here, Rowe resides in Maryland. Given the limited scope of her testimony (Plaintiff expects

her testimony would take approximately five (5) minutes), it would be too costly to have Rowe

testify at trial. Her testimony is relevant on two points: (1) the testimony will show that Anderson

performed the essential functions of her job (including safety duties) in an exemplary manner

including one day prior to being removed; and (2) contrary to statements given by other flight crew

members, Anderson did not engage in any conflicts with passengers on that flight leg.

Accordingly, Plaintiff requests that the Court allow her to call Rowe as a witness via live

televideo subject to cross-examination. Alternatively, Plaintiff requests that if live televideo

technology is not available or properly working that Plaintiff be allowed to present Rowe’s

 

4

 Anderson has not flown with American Airlines as a flight attendant since August 21, 2003, the

date she was removed by Captain Hoffman.

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 72 Filed 01/29/2008 Page 3 of 4 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 75 Filed 03/05/08 Page 3 of 4
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

27

28

MOTION IN LIMINE RE: REQUEST FOR

TELEVIDEO WITNESS TESTIMONY

CASE NO C 05-04292 SI

4.

testimony via two-way telephone conference testimony subject to cross-examination. Further, if

counsel wishes to show any document to the witness which the witness is testifying, counsel must

provide the document to witness prior to the date of the testimony.

Dated: January 29, 2008 //_____________________________

Gregory S. Redmond, Esq.

Attorney for Plaintiff

Greta Anderson 

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 72 Filed 01/29/2008 Page 4 of 4

The Court will allow live televideo subject to cross examination if avaiable

in the courtroom

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Susan Illston

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 75 Filed 03/05/08 Page 4 of 4