Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, ANTITRUST NEWS: City of Dallas seeks to disqualify Delta Air Lines’ attorney, (Jun 24, 2015)

By Greg Hammond, J.D.

The City of Dallas has filed an emergency motion for disqualification of Delta Air Lines, Inc.’s attorney, Robert C. Walters, claiming a conflict of interest. Walters allegedly represented the City in similar antitrust litigation concerning the Wright Amendment Reform Act (City of Dallas v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., June 23, 2015).

Dallas owns and operates the airport known as Dallas Love Field. The current litigation, according to the City’s emergency motion brief, concerns Delta’s demand for permanent accommodation of its flights at Love Field under the color of Dallas’ obligations to further competition at Love Field under Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Specifically, Delta has accused Dallas of engaging directly in anticompetitive, collusive conduct and breaching its federal obligations, including to prevent unjust discrimination and the grant of an exclusive right at Love Field.

One of Delta’s attorneys, Robert C. Walters—currently a partner at Gibson Dunn and Crutcher, LLP—previously represented the City in similar litigation, Dallas alleges. Walters’ biography states that he “both represented the City of Dallas before Congress in securing the Wright Amendment Reform Act (WARA) and as lead counsel in defeating private antitrust litigation stemming from the Act.” At the time Walters represented the City, he was a partner at Vinson & Elkins, LLP.

Dallas now seeks to disqualify Walters and other attorneys that previously worked for Vinson & Elkins, LLP from representing Delta, arguing: (1) it is beyond a doubt that an attorney-client relationship existed between Dallas and Walters, given Walters’ admission that he represented the City; (2) there is a substantial relationship between the antitrust issues that were raised or could have been raised when Walters represented Dallas and the current complaint regarding Delta’s accommodation request, which is also steeped in antitrust law; (3) it is indisputable that Dallas on one hand, and Walters on behalf of Delta on the other, are adverse, given Delta’s accusations of Dallas’ anticompetitive, collusive conduct; and (4) Walters never obtained verbal or written consent from Dallas to act as litigation counsel for Delta.

The City additionally alleges exceptional circumstances, noting that the passage of WARA was a very high-profile event that received a lot of media coverage, and that Walters was instrumental in crafting and obtaining passage of WARA and defended Dallas in a federal antitrust suit stemming from the legislation. Because the instant case is another related, high-profile matter, Dallas claims that Walter’s representation of Delta implies that there could be some truth to the allegations that Dallas has acted in an anticompetitive manner with regard to Love Field, and that such harm outweighs Delta’s interest in retaining Walters.

The case is Civil Action No. 3:15-cv-02069-K.

Attorneys: Robert C. Walters (Gibson Dunn and Crutcher, LLP) for Delta Air Lines, Inc. Peter B. Haskel, Office of the City Attorney, for City of Dallas.

Companies: Delta Air Lines, Inc.

News: Antitrust