Anaheim Decides to Appeal Court Loss

With the prospect of Los Angeles Angels T-shirts for sale across the land, and with the Angels unwilling to relent on seeking reimbursement for the $7 million they spent to defend themselves, the Anaheim City Council voted Tuesday to appeal its defeat in its lawsuit against the Angels.

The vote was 4 to 1, with Councilman Harry Sidhu opposed. City attorneys plan to file the appeal this week. A ruling is not likely until after the 2007 season.

Mayor Curt Pringle said settlement talks had failed, citing “the Angels’ insistence on getting ... a portion or all of their attorneys’ fees paid by the taxpayers of Anaheim.”

Said Angels spokesman Tim Mead: “The club is the defendant. We didn’t sue anybody.”

Orange County Superior Court Judge Peter Polos has yet to rule whether the Angels are entitled to any reimbursement. The parties could revive settlement talks once Polos issues that decision.

When the Angels added Los Angeles to their name last year, the city sued. In February, a jury found the new name did not violate the stadium lease.

Pringle said Polos made numerous errors during the trial, including not allowing several city witnesses to testify, not mandating jurors to consider the intent of the parties negotiating the lease and not rejecting the testimony of a former Disney executive who said he envisioned the addition of a second city to the team name but could not recall telling that to city negotiators.

Several jurors told city attorneys those rulings could have influenced the outcome, Pringle said.

Pringle also said that Polos’ post-trial ruling that the Angels could market themselves as the Los Angeles Angels, with no mention of Anaheim, “goes far beyond what the jury has stated.”

The city’s legal bill stands at $3.8 million, with an appeal capped at $150,000.

In dissenting, Sidhu said most appeals are unsuccessful and an appellate loss could subject taxpayers to added liability in a case in which “we have lost every inning.”