JetAway says judge should be recused

MONTROSE —  Claiming affidavits against it are “false and fraudulent,” JetAway Aviation wants its May 5 hearing on alleged violations of a previous court order vacated. It also says the judge recused from the case.

JetAway is fending off a demand for sanctions made by its business rival, Black Canyon Jet Center, which claims JetAway was still advertising aviation fuel despite being found in contempt of a previous court order prohibiting such advertising.

The two companies are locked in a bitter dispute concerning fixed-base operations at Montrose Regional Airport. Black Canyon, also known as Jet Center Partners, won the FBO contract from Montrose County two years ago, but JetAway, which operates adjacent to the airport, said the county is unfairly restricting business opportunity there and is conspiring with Black Canyon.

The county denied JetAway’s allegations. A district court trial and a federal antitrust suit against the county are pending.

Judge James Schum found JetAway in contempt last November and warned there would be sanctions if it engaged in further prohibited advertising. He imposed, but suspended, a $50,000 fine.

In an April 3 filing, Black Canyon/JCP alleged JetAway had both advertised and “duped” pilots into thinking it sold fuel, despite a lease agreement prohibiting fuel sales.

JetAway said in its April 14 reply pilot affidavits submitted to bolster JCP’s claims were “false and fraudulent” and the court was afoul of “fundamental due process of law” because it set a sentencing hearing on JCP’s complaint without giving JetAway an opportunity to defend itself.

“The court, without issuing a citation, conducting a hearing or otherwise allowing JetAway to respond to JCP’s pleading...issued a minute order setting a ‘sentencing hearing’ for May 5,” the reply read.

JetAway’s attorneys argued later in the filing that Schum improperly entered punitive sanctions in a remedial contempt hearing. Since he initiated a punitive contempt proceeding, the reply said, Schum must recuse himself. JetAway said that by setting the matter for “sentencing,” Schum showed “prejudgment” and “bias.”

JetAway also said because JCP’s allegations were fresh, it was entitled to a hearing on them, and should be allowed to subpoena pilots whose affidavits JCP relied upon in its allegations.

Black Canyon/JCP had submitted an affidavit from pilot Matt Rigby, which said JetAway’s online advertisement led him to believe it was an FBO. The affidavit claimed JetAway told Rigby it sold fuel for less than JCP, and only after he arrived did he learn JetAway did not sell fuel.

In its reply, JetAway denied advertising itself online as a fuel provider. It said the Rigby affidavit looked like it was prepared by someone else and “we don’t know ... how the affiants may have been persuaded to sign them.”

JetAway later said Rigby’s claims about finding JetAway listed as an FBO on the AcuKwik Web site were false. Its response includes an e-mail from AcuKwik “confirming JetAway’s ad was removed no later than Nov., 29, 2007.”

JetAway also said a second affidavit, signed by pilot Brandt Sargent of UltraAir, was in error. Sargent said in the affidavit he was also misled into thinking JetAway sold fuel. His director of operations, John Koltes, said in an affidavit he was assured by JetAway the aircraft could be refueled there.

JetAway’s reply says it was clear from the advertising the men used that JetAway did not sell fuel. It said Koltes claimed to have found information about JetAway on AirNav.com, but “the FBO briefing he faxed to JetAway clearly exhibits the www.FltPlan.com Web address.”

JetAway attached the FltPlan.com Web page for Montrose Regional.

“Nowhere in the JetAway entry is fuel advertised. Under the JetAway entry for ‘fuel available’ is the entry: ‘No fuel available,’” the reply stated.

JetAway additionally claims Koltes could not have spoken with an employee at the time he said he had and the fee JetAway charged UltraAir reflected an after-hours opening of the jet facility.

The jet facility further said the accusations made no sense.

“JetAway has no incentive to tell customers it sells fuel, in fact, the opposite is true. It would make no sense for any JetAway employee to tell an incoming customer that JetAway sells fuel because all that JetAway would get out of such a transaction is a very unhappy former customer,” the reply read.

The company also denied continuing to place online advertisements.