Martin Baker Aircraft Company Ltd. v. Teledyne Risi, Inc. et al.

Breach of contract, Fraud, Defense won on anti-SLAPP motion

Central District of California

U.S. District Judge Percy Anderson

Tanya Greene

Defense Lawyers: McGuireWoods LLP, Gregory Evans, Tanya L. Greene, Piper A. Waldron, Gregory J. DuBoff

Plaintiff's Lawyers: Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP, Joshua D. Lichtman, Katherine G. Connolly, Matthew H. Kirtland

Not every failed lawsuit is frivolous. That was the message U.S. District Judge Percy Anderson sent to Martin Baker Aircraft Company Ltd and its attorneys in October when he dismissed their malicious prosecution complaint against Teledyne RISI Inc.

"It demonstrates the importance of the anti-SLAPP statute to litigants who have valid claims, in particular the importance of being able to bring those claims before courts without facing subsequent malicious prosecution claims, which as we know are typically vengeful claims brought for the purpose of deterring further litigation," said Gregory H. Evans, who led Teledyne's defense.

"It chills a lot of parties, companies and individuals, from seeking redress," said Evans, a partner with McGuireWoods LLP in Los Angeles.

Greg Evans

Martin-Baker's counsel, with Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP, declined to comment.

Teledyne manufactures parts for military aircraft. In 2015, it brought claims against Martin-Baker including fraud, breach of contract and tortious interference. It alleged Martin Baker had violated a contract making Teledyne the exclusive supplier for a part used in ejection seats.

Three of Teledyne's claims survived summary judgment, though a jury later rejected them.

In its subsequent complaint, Martin-Baker's attorneys labeled Teledyne's complaint "a false and malicious fairytale."

They sought compensatory damages, fees for attorneys and expert witnesses, and "punitive and exemplary damages in an amount sufficient to deter such conduct in the future."

Evans said Teledyne quickly moved to avoid "long and expensive litigation." His response focused on what they claimed was a lack of evidence from Martin-Baker, especially that would show malice by his clients in filing the original case.

He also argued there was probable cause for most of Teledyne's claims, even though a jury later rejected them. Evans and his team got Martin-Baker's case dismissed in less than seven months. Martin Baker Aircraft Company Ltd. v. Teledyne RISI Inc. et al., 20-CV03796 (C.D. Cal., filed April 24, 2020).

"The statute worked as it was intended to work," Evans said. "It stopped the litigation immediately."

-- Malcolm Maclachlan