Employment Litigation in the District Court for the District of Columbia:
Campbell, et al. v. Amtrak, 1:99CV02979 (EGS) – SETTLED

 

The long-running case Campbell, et al. v. Amtrak, originally filed in November 1998, has now been settled.  We are gratified to have reached a resolution of the case for our Campbell clients.  The Campbell case demonstrates the long-term commitment Wiggins Childs Pantazis Fisher Goldfarb has to its clients and to the cause of civil rights.  We congratulate the Campbell clients on their settlement, and thank them for retaining WCPFG to represent them.

Williams, et al. v. Amtrak, 1:21CV1122 (EGS)(MU) – ACTIVE AND ONGOING

Approximately 275 of the former members of the putative, i.e., uncertified, classes as defined in the Campbell, et al. v. Amtrak case, filed their own individual-multi-plaintiffs case in 2021.  Amtrak has tried to get this case, or parts of it, dismissed on a variety of grounds, some of which the District Court has rejected, and some of which are still pending. The case has evolved somewhat, and now has approximately 168 Plaintiffs. Some plaintiffs exited the case because they either decided not to proceed, fell out of touch with counsel and could not be located, or died (if the personal representative of the estate was either unwilling to proceed or has not been found). We filed a Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”) in July 2023 addressing the claims of these 168 Plaintiffs.

Amtrak then filed a Motion To Dismiss or in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment, together with a Memo of Law, a Statement of Facts, and a number of exhibits (MTD Exhibits A-E). We filed a Plaintiffs’ Opposition to same, with a Counter-Statement of Facts and other exhibits. Amtrak filed its Reply (Reply Exhibit 2), and we supplemented our Opposition, so the Motion is fully briefed.

The basic issue behind the Motion To Dismiss is which Plaintiffs and which of their individual claims, can remain in the case. This Motion is now pending before a Magistrate Judge, who will issue a ruling, probably in the form of a “Report and Recommendation,” that goes to the District Judge for review. Both sides will then have an opportunity to file Objections to the Report and Recommendation, and to respond to the other side’s objections. The District Judge will then consider whether to adopt the Report and Recommendation or reject it, or some combination of each, and it is this decision that will determine whose claims are dismissed, in whole or in part. Those whose claims are dismissed will have the right to appeal.

What’s Next? Many of you have asked when the Court will decide the pending Motion. We simply do not know. It is a very complex motion, and there are many issues and arguments to consider. Although it may seem like a long time has passed, it is not been an unusually long period of time for a complex motion such as this. The Court determines its own schedule and rarely announces when any decision is forthcoming. Further, we cannot ask for the simple reason that it will not do any good and such inquiries are frowned upon by the Court. In fact, parties are generally not supposed to contact the judge’s chambers either by phone or letter or email. Please understand that the time passage since the briefing was completed near the end of December, 2023, is not at all unusual in the federal courts. Please do not take it upon yourself to contact the Court because it would be highly inappropriate to do so and it will not get any answer, and please do not ask me to do so, for the same reasons. When the Report and Recommendation is issued, it will be posted here.

Settlement? Amtrak knows the Plaintiffs’ side is open to settlement discussions and negotiations: we always have been. However, it takes both parties to engage in a negotiation, so we will have to see if time or developments, perhaps a ruling on the Motion To Dismiss, encourage Amtrak to negotiate. We were able to bring the Campbell case to a resolution through mediated negotiations, and we believe Williams can be resolved by good faith negotiations, too.

For all named Plaintiffs in Williams, et al. v. Amtrak:

• If your physical residence address (not P.O. Box) is now different from what is listed in the caption of the THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT, please contact lead counsel, as indicated below.
• If your other contact information, including mailing address, telephone number(s), or email address(es) have changed in the past two years, please contact lead counsel.
• If you are a named Plaintiff in Williams, listed above, but have not been able open or download the pdate Letters sent out since June 1, 2023, please contact lead counsel.
• If you are a named Plaintiff in Williams, listed above, please read the Update Letters carefully and thoroughly.
  • Please remember that the Update Letters, and all communications to and from your lawyers, are PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL and not to be shared with anyone else and are not to be uploaded or discussed on any type of social media.
  • If you have any questions about this, or anything else regarding the case, please communicate directly with lead counsel, as indicated below, or with the staff of Wiggins Childs.
  • Please note that the Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs, which was our co-counsel in the Campbell case, is NOT involved in Williams at all. If you contact the WLC, they will simply direct you to Wiggins Childs.
• If you are listed as a Plaintiff in the Third Amended Complaint in the link above, but you do not want to be in the Williams, et al. v. Amtrak case, please contact lead counsel.
• No additional plaintiffs will be added to the Williams, et al. v. Amtrak
• Named Plaintiffs: please watch your email for more Updates and check in at this web page periodically for other news and posted documents.

** Please note that some of these documents have some information redacted. That is because those portions reveal information that, by agreement of the parties, must be kept private, and/or because they contain sensitive personal information. If you believe you are subject to these redactions and want to know more about it, please contact your attorney, Timothy B. Fleming.

 

Lead Attorney in the Washington, D.C. office for Williams, et al. v. Amtrak:
Timothy Fleming, of counsel
Wiggins Childs Pantazis Fisher Goldfarb, PLLC
2208 18^th Street, N.W., # 110
Washington, D.C. 20009

Email: tfleming@wigginschilds.com

Office phone no. (for voice mail only): (202) 467-4489

Fax no.: (205) 453-4907