151900P.pdf   08/31/2017  John Watson, V  v.  Air Methods Corporation
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-1900
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, for the Court En Banc] 
   Civil case - Airline Deregulation Act. For the panel's opinion, see Watson 
   v. Air Methods, Corp., 834 F.3d 891 (8th Cir. 2016). In an action alleging 
   a common-law claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy, 
   the district court erred in dismissing the complaint on the ground it was 
   pre-empted by the pre-emption provision of the Airline Deregulation Act, 
   49 U.S.C. Section 41713(b)(1). Held: The Airline Deregulation Act does not 
   expressly pre-empt plaintiff's state-law wrongful-discharge claim 
   involving post-hoc reporting of alleged violations of air-safety 
   regulations. To the extent the court's earlier opinion in Botz v. Omni Air 
   International, 286 F.3d 488 (8th Cir. 2002)holds to the contrary, it is 
   overruled. 
  
151900P.pdf   08/24/2016  John Watson, V  v.  Air Methods Corporation
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-1900
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Melloy and Colloton, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Civil case - Employment law. Plaintiff's common-law tort action for 
   wrongful discharge in violation of public policy was properly dismissed 
   based on the preemption provision of the Airline Deregulation Act, see 
   Botz v. Omni Air International, 286 F.3d 488 (8th Cir. 2002); while this 
   case has been criticized in other circuits' opinions, one panel cannot 
   overturn another, and any request for reexamination of the decision should 
   be made in a petition for rehearing en banc.