Adding News to suit opposed

Sale of the Salt Lake Tribune - Read Deseret News archive stories and see related links about the sale of the Tribune.

AT&T Corp. and MediaNews Group — both named in a lawsuit by the Salt Lake Tribune Publishing Co. — say they oppose the addition of the Deseret News as a defendant because doing so could put the case before a new judge.

AT&T added its concerns to those of the Tribune's new owner, the Denver-based MediaNews, in a 10-page memorandum filed Monday in federal court.

"The AT&T defendants have no objection to (the management company's) proposed amendments so long as such amendments, including the addition of the Deseret News, will not result in the destruction of the court's subject matter jurisdiction here," the court document stated.

Federal judges hear civil cases when the opposing parties are from different states. Adding the Deseret News Publishing Co. as a defendant would mean the plaintiff in the case, the Tribune management company, and the Deseret News are both from Utah.

AT&T is a New York corporation with its principal place of business in New Jersey. AT&T Broadband, named separately from AT&T Corp. in the suit, and MediaNews are both Delaware limited liability companies with their principal places of business in Colorado.

AT&T and MediaNews worry that the addition of the Deseret News would "destroy diversity" on this jurisdictional question.

The original lawsuit was filed in December, when managers of the Tribune attempted to keep AT&T from selling the holding company of the newspaper to MediaNews.

U.S. District Judge Tena Campbell denied the managers' request for a preliminary injunction to stop the sale, and the transaction was completed on Jan. 2.

The managers still contend that MediaNews, AT&T and the Deseret News have conspired to deprive them of their right to control the newspaper and buy it back in the summer of 2002.

Tribune managers told Campbell at the last hearing in the case that they would argue that federal court jurisdiction does not change by the subsequent joinders of new, non-diverse parties. A 1991 U.S. Supreme Court ruling supports that argument.

But the 10th Circuit Court, among other courts, has limited that principle to situations where there is substitution of parties, as opposed to the addition of parties — or where the court adds a non-essential party, based on actions subsequent to filing the original complaint.

---

E-MAIL: mtitze@desnews.com