Lawyers Belli, Greene Face Off in Courtroom : Attorneys Trade Stinging Insults in Malpractice Case Stemming From 1981 Personal-Injury Trial

In the first public confrontation in their private feud, noted attorneys Melvin M. Belli and R. Browne Greene sparred briskly in an Orange County courtroom Wednesday as Greene denied that he failed to inform clients of a $2-million offer in a case he ultimately lost.

Greene, target of a malpractice suit filed by those former clients, also denied that he failed to get their consent before rejecting the offer, which was made by Ford Motor Co. at the start of jury deliberations on July 30, 1981.

Jurors in the Ford case returned a verdict in favor of the company on Aug. 4. An appeal was turned down last year.

At several points during Greene’s testimony, comments by Greene and Belli prompted murmurs among spectators, mostly lawyers, who filled the courtroom.

Bhopal Reference

When Belli asked, for instance, why Greene’s office maintained a lobby exhibit of newspaper clips on previous courtroom victories, Greene began his explanation by staring at Belli and saying, “Instead of contacting clients directly as some people do . . . . “

The comment was a reference to the nationwide criticism of Belli and other lawyers who went to Bhopal, India, to solicit clients injured in the poison gas leak that killed more than 2,000 last December. Belli has said he was there at the invitation of an Indian lawyer.

The repartee between the two was often pointed and quick, forcing Superior Court Judge Leonard Goldstein to warn Belli to let Greene finish answering each question before asking another.

The two attorneys began their feud in 1981, when disputes arose over which would represent a woman injured in a movie stunt, and over Belli’s subsequent support for Greene’s opponent in a race for president of the California Trial Lawyers’ Assn. Belli’s candidate won.

Greene’s testimony contradicted the sometimes inconsistent testimony of private investigator Walter C. Goode of Orange and plaintiff Fabiola P. Castro of Santa Ana, one of Greene’s former clients.

Testimony by Greene and investigator Goode often conflicted.

Castro and two Mexican nationals, Maria Dolores Ornelas and Ventura Munoz Flores, were seriously burned and Ornelas’ 8-day-old son by Ventura’s brother, Jose Munoz Flores, was killed in 1976 when a pickup truck Ventura was driving rolled over and caught fire in Pomona.

During a complex, six-week trial, Greene tried to prove that the design of a gas tank was defective, causing the death and the injuries.

Greene said that as he was about to give his final closing argument in the case, Ford’s lawyer, Marshall Hunt of Los Angeles, handed him a note saying he was authorized to settle the case for $2 million, twice as much as Ford had offered at the start of the trial.

Greene testified that at a lunch break after arguments, he told Goode to contact the four plaintiffs, tell them about the offer, including the amount, and bring them to court so he could discuss it with them.

He said he told Goode he was recommending that the clients reject the offer.

The next day, a Friday, Ford renewed the offer in a typewritten letter that put a time limit on acceptance. Greene had to respond before the jury pushed a buzzer indicating it had reached a verdict.

Greene testified that Goode notified him that the clients agreed to reject the offer. Castro and Ornelas later came to court without the Flores brothers, Greene said, and he explained the offer to them.

He said the Flores brothers often were difficult to find, wanting to “remain incognito” to avoid immigration authorities. Goode and the clients, he said, had insisted that Goode be the primary contact between the lawyer and his clients.

Jury Favored Ford

He said lawyers often have to work through intermediaries, such as relatives, in cases dealing with catastrophic injuries.

While he was confident of a verdict in their favor, he said, he also warned Castro and Ornelas that the jury could return a verdict for Ford, which it did later in the day.

Greene acknowledged that he did not tell his clients that the issue of Ford’s liability was “tenuous.”

The lawyer said his clients agreed to reject the offer. He recommended rejection, he said, because he had never spoken to the Flores brothers about the offer, because the offer was in a lump sum and not broken down for each plaintiff and because it was not enough money.

He said he explained they would only get to split up about $800,000 by the time the law firm took 40% for a fee and about $200,000 for costs and after Goode took his 10% fee, which he had negotiated with the plaintiffs before he ever took the case to Greene’s office.

Inconsistent Testimony

Goode has maintained that he was told simply to relay a message that an offer had been made--without mentioning the amount--and that Greene had rejected it.

But his testimony was often inconsistent and contradictory. Goode testified Tuesday, for instance, that he lied to his clients at least twice. But Wednesday he denied he ever said the previous day that he lied to them.

Castro, the only plaintiff who speaks English fluently, testified that she never heard about any settlement offers, that no one ever talked to her about how the case was progressing, that she would have accepted a $2-million offer and that she was never told the trial was over.

She also contradicted Goode, who described in detail about how he came to her house on Feb. 1, 1982, to get her signature on a statement Greene wanted. She said a man she never met before came with the documents.