UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

Roger Wright, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No.: 1:06-CV- 647-WKW

)

Pemco World Air Services, Inc. )

)

Defendant. )

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

COMES NOW Defendant Pemco World Air Services, Inc. (“Pemco” or “Defendant”),

pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and respectfully requests that this

Honorable Court enter a complete summary judgment in favor of Pemco. As grounds for this

motion, Pemco states that there are no genuine issues of material fact as to any of Plaintiff Roger

Wright’s (“Plaintiff”) claims and Pemco is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law. In

support of its motion, Pemco shows the Court the following:

1. This case arises from Plaintiff’s inclusion in a reduction in force in July 2005. In

2005, Pemco was faced with a rapid decline in the number of aircraft coming into the facility,

largely due to the uncertainty surrounding labor contract negotiations over an expiring collective

bargaining agreement. As a result of the reduced work load, during the Spring and Summer of

2005, Pemco had to realign some of its departments and conduct a series of reductions in force.

Those reductions affected not only bargaining unit employees, but eventually included many

indirect employees, or employees who do not work directly on the aircraft. Plaintiff was one of

more than 25 indirect employees who were reduced or laid off between May 20, 2005 and

August 9, 2005. Plaintiff had been on paid medical leave beginning in June 2005.

Case 1:06-cv-00647-WKW-SRW Document 22 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 1 of 4
2

2. Plaintiff now sues Pemco asserting violations of the Family and Medical Leave

Act of 1993, 29 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq. (“FMLA”), Alabama common law, the Age

Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. (“ADEA”), the Americans

with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. (“ADA”), and the Employee Retirement

Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. (“ERISA”).

1

Plaintiff specifically alleges Pemco

acted in an intentionally outrageous, unlawful manner by willfully demoting him and then

terminating his employment while he was on medical leave and replacing him with a

substantially younger individual, ultimately denying him retirement benefits to which he would

otherwise be entitled. All claims fail for numerous reasons and Pemco is entitled to summary

judgment as a matter of law.

3. For the reasons set forth in Pemco’s summary judgment brief, which is filed

simultaneously herewith, Pemco is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law with regard

to Plaintiff’s FMLA claim(s) because Plaintiff would have been laid off in July 2005 irrespective

of any FMLA qualifying leave. Similarly, Plaintiff cannot establish a prima facie case of FMLA

retaliation or rebut Pemco’s legitimate, nonretaliatory reasons for terminating his employment.

4. Pemco is entitled to summary judgment with regard to Plaintiff’s outrage claim

because Plaintiff fails to allege facts that rise to the level of actionable outrage under Alabama

law. Hardesty v. CPRM Corp., 391 F. Supp. 2d 1067, 1073-74 (M.D. Ala. 2005).

5. Pemco is entitled to summary judgment with regard to Plaintiff’s age

discrimination claim because Plaintiff cannot establish a prima facie case of age discrimination.

Moreover, Plaintiff cannot rebut Pemco’s legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for including

1

In an email dated September 17, 2007, counsel for Plaintiff expressly agreed that Plaintiff’s perceived disability

claim under the ADA is due to be dismissed. As a result, Pemco will not address Count IV in this motion or

supporting brief.

Case 1:06-cv-00647-WKW-SRW Document 22 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 2 of 4
3

him in the layoffs and establish by significantly probative evidence that the reason was a pretext

for age discrimination.

6. Pemco is entitled to summary judgment with regard to Plaintiff’s ERISA claim

because he has provided no evidence whatsoever that his inclusion in the July 2005 layoffs was

for the purpose of interfering with his ERISA rights. As a result, Plaintiff cannot establish a

prima facie case of a § 510 violation. Clark v. Coats & Clark, Inc., 990 F.2d 1217, 1223-24

(11

th Cir. 1993).

7. No genuine issue of material fact exists and Pemco is entitled to summary

judgment as a matter of law.

8. In support of its motion for summary judgment, Pemco relies on the pleadings

filed to date. Pemco further relies on relevant excerpts from Plaintiff’s deposition (a complete

copy of which is attached to Pemco’s Evidentiary Submission as Exhibit 1). Furthermore,

Pemco relies on the Declaration of Francis X. Henry (which is attached to Pemco’s Evidentiary

Submission as Exhibit 2, with exhibit). Pemco also relies on the Declaration of Dennis Johnson

(which is attached to Pemco’s Evidentiary Submission as Exhibit 3, with exhibit). Pemco also

relies of the Depositions of Dennis Johnson, Clarke Briody, Jackie Tindle, Richard Miller, and

Ted Ball (which are attached to Pemco’s Evidentiary Submission as Exhibits 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8,

respectively). Finally, Pemco relies on its Brief in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment, a

copy of which is being filed simultaneously herewith.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant Pemco World Air Services, Inc.

respectfully requests that this Court enter an Order granting summary judgment as a matter of

law in its favor as to all claims asserted by the Plaintiff in this action.

Case 1:06-cv-00647-WKW-SRW Document 22 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 3 of 4
4

Respectfully submitted,

s/ John B. Holmes, III

JEFFREY A. LEE

JOHN B. HOLMES, III

Attorneys for Defendant

OF COUNSEL:

MAYNARD, COOPER & GALE, P.C.

2400 AmSouth/Harbert Plaza

1901 Sixth Avenue North

Birmingham, Alabama 35203-2618

Telephone: 205.254.1000

Facsimile: 205.254.1999

Emails: jlee@maynardcooper.com

jholmes@maynardcooper.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on September 24, 2007, I electronically filed the foregoing with the

Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the

following:

Elizabeth B. Glasgow

Farmer, Price, Hornsby & Weatherford, L.L.P.

100 Adris Place (36303)

Post Office Drawer 2228

Dothan, Alabama 36302

s/ John B. Holmes, III

. OF COUNSEL

Case 1:06-cv-00647-WKW-SRW Document 22 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 4 of 4