# Boeing Co. v. Sw. Airlines Pilots Ass'n

Supreme Court of Texas, No. 22-1124

**Boeing Co. v. Sw. Airlines Pilots Ass'n, No. 22-1124, is before the Supreme Court of Texas. Key issue: The Court denied Boeing's petition for review of a court of appeals decision reversing a Rule 91a dismissal of the union's second suit as assignee of 8,794 pilots, without opinion.**

Practice areas: civil procedure

## Key issues

- The Court denied Boeing's petition for review of a court of appeals decision reversing a Rule 91a dismissal of the union's second suit as assignee of 8,794 pilots, without opinion.
- The petition asked whether a court may decide a res judicata defense on a Rule 91a motion by considering an uncontested public record of a prior suit attached to the defendant's answer.

## Factual History
This is the second of two suits by the Southwest Airlines Pilots Association against Boeing over the 737 MAX and the union's 2016 collective bargaining agreement; the first is No. 22-0631. Its five claims repeat those dismissed in the first suit, but SWAPA sues as assignee of 8,794 of its member pilots (Petition for Review, PDF pp. 9, 15-17; Opinion in No. 22-0631, PDF p. 7 n.11).

## Procedural History
Boeing moved to dismiss under Rule 91a on res judicata, attaching SWAPA's first petition to its answer; the trial court dismissed. The Fifth Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, holding res judicata could not be decided on materials outside the petition. Boeing petitioned February 22, 2023; the Court denied review May 31, 2024, withdrew that denial and reinstated the petition January 10, 2025 on rehearing, and on June 20, 2025 denied the petition, noting in No. 22-0631 that it denied review of that judgment (Petition for Review, PDF pp. 9, 17-18; Docket).

## Issues Presented
Whether a court may consider an uncontested public judicial record attached to the answer in deciding a Rule 91a motion on res judicata, and whether SWAPA waived or invited any error (Petition for Review, PDF p. 11).

## Legal Arguments
**Boeing (Petitioner):** Rule 91a.6 and Rule 59 permit consideration of records that are part of the matter set up in defense, and SWAPA invited the court to compare the petitions. **SWAPA (Respondent):** Rule 91a bars extrinsic evidence, and res judicata does not apply because the first dismissal rested on lack of jurisdiction (Petition for Review, PDF pp. 12-14; Response to Petition, PDF pp. 5-7).

## Stated Reasons the Court Should Take the Case
Not applicable; the case ended on a motion.

## Practice Area Tags
civil-procedure

## Procedural Posture/Vehicle
Petition for review from the Fifth Court of Appeals; denied June 20, 2025 without opinion (Docket).

## Amicus Involvement
None noted

---
Source: The SCOTX Report, https://scotxreport.com/cases/22-1124. AI-generated summary of the Court's opinion, orders and the parties' briefs, with pin cites to the page of each document; verify against the Court's own documents at search.txcourts.gov.