PHILADELPHIA – Avco Corporation and Textron are seeking judgment on the pleadings in litigation brought by a Florida plaintiff couple, one of whom is an attorney who represented Avco in aircraft crash legislation and later alleged law firm Blank Rome pursued an injunction she said would have ruined her career.
Veronica Turner and Kevin Turner of Dunnellon, Fla. first filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on Feb. 19 versus Avco Corporation of Greenwich, Conn., Textron, Inc. of Providence, R.I., Blank Rome, LLP, James T. Smith, Esq., Rebecca Ward, Esq. and Heidi G. Crikelair, Esq., all of Philadelphia.
The plaintiffs accused the defendants of wrongfully accusing Ms. Turner of ethical breaches and other improper conduct. They claimed that the defendants falsely asserted that Ms. Turner had used information allegedly gleaned in her representation of Avco Corporation in later representing plaintiffs against it.
The defendants are accused of initiating and continuing a meritless action against Ms. Turner with the intent to destroy her career and subjecting her to unnecessary discovery and fact-finding processes intended to cause significant expense, embarrassment and humiliation.
The plaintiffs further alleged that the defendants sought an injunction based solely on a single assignment carried out by Ms. Turner, on a case in which Avco Corporation was not even a party.
They claimed that this was part of an attempt to financially ruin Ms. Turner and destroy her reputation.
UPDATE
Avco Corporation and Textron, Inc. filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings on April 19, seeking for the Court to end the matter.
“Ms. Turner advances a claim under the Dragonetti Act, which was enacted to protect citizens of the Commonwealth from maliciously brought lawsuits. Ms. Turner, by her own admission, was not a citizen of Pennsylvania when the underlying litigation was commenced, nor at any time since. Even so, the Dragonetti Act is not violated if the plaintiff in the underlying suit had probable cause to bring one or more of its claims. Here, the orders and decisions of the District Court and the Third Circuit demonstrate that Avco had probable cause for the underlying litigation as a matter of law,” the motion stated.
“Those courts denied Ms. Turner’s multiple motions to dismiss Avco’s complaint and appeals, determined that Avco’s damages arguments were made in good faith; and found that Ms. Turner had represented clients that were materially adverse to Avco. Ms. Turner’s Dragonetti Act claim also fails because she has not pled any facts that would plausibly demonstrate that Avco lacked probable cause for the underlying litigation.”
The corporate defendants continued that the plaintiffs’ civil conspiracy claim likewise did not pass muster.
“Ms. Turner’s claim for civil conspiracy fails because it does not state facts that could plausibly demonstrate a violation of any underlying crime or tort (Dragonetti Act or otherwise), nor does it allege the requisite agreement for a civil conspiracy. In any event, the intra-corporate conspiracy doctrine bars Ms. Turner’s claims as pled. Ms. Turner’s husband, Kevin Turner, also a citizen of Florida, alleges a claim for loss of consortium. That claim is derivative of Ms. Turner’s Dragonetti Act claim and it fails for the same reasons,” the motion added.
“For all of these reasons, judgment on the pleadings should enter in Avco/Textron’s favor on Ms. Turner’s Dragonetti Act claim. As an additional and independent basis for dismissal, Avco/Textron adopts the arguments advanced by the individual defendants in their motion to dismiss under Rule 41(a)(1)(b)’s two dismissal rule. An adjudication on the merits that Blank Rome did not violate the Dragonetti Act, by virtue of the two dismissal rule, is dispositive of plaintiffs’ claims against Avco/Textron. As Avco/Textron has asserted an advice-of-counsel defense and could only act in the underlying litigation through its attorneys, with whom they were in privity, plaintiffs’ claims against Avco/Textron are barred by res judicata.”
For counts of wrongful use of civil proceedings, civil conspiracy and loss of consortium, the plaintiffs are seeking compensatory and punitive damages in an amount exceeding $75,000, as well as any other relief the Court deems just and proper.
The plaintiffs are represented by Wayne A. Ely in Richboro.
The defendants are represented by Jeffrey N. Rosenthal and Brian S. Paszamant of Blank Rome in Philadelphia, Joseph E. O’Neil and Katherine A. Wang of Campbell Conroy & O’Neil in Berwyn, plus Daniel J. Procaccini, John A. Tarantino and Nicole J. Benjamin of Adler Pollock & Sheehan, P.C. in Providence, R.I.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:24-cv-00715
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com