Torrance to Settle Death Lawsuit for $6.5 Million : Liability: The city abandons its efforts to appeal the penalty for a police cover-up in a San Pedro youth’s 1984 traffic death. Attorneys are expected today to sign the settlement, which is the largest in the city’s history.

Attorneys today expect to sign a $6.5-million legal settlement, the largest in Torrance city history, to resolve a 1984 wrongful-death suit in which jurors concluded that Torrance police routinely conspired to protect their colleagues.

The settlement would go to John Rastello of San Pedro, whose 19-year-old son, Kelly, died in an Aug. 30, 1984, traffic collision with off-duty Torrance Police Sgt. Rollo Green.

City officials said the settlement will be a financial blow to Torrance; only $3.5 million will be covered by insurance.

A Los Angeles Superior Court jury in 1989 found that the Police Department covered up for Green, who had been drinking before the accident, in part by delaying a field sobriety test for more than an hour and by failing to measure Green’s blood-alcohol level. The jury also concluded that the cover-up stemmed from a Police Department “custom and policy” of condoning misbehavior by officers.

The jury awarded Rastello $5.5 million for his son’s death, with Superior Court Judge Abby Soven ordering the city to pay $2.1 million more in attorneys’ fees.

Because of an appeal by the city, no money has been paid to John Rastello, and accrued interest has pushed the amount owed by the city to more than $9 million, attorneys confirmed. Had the city’s appeal dragged on, that amount soon could have risen to more than $10 million.

Both sides last night called the $6.5-million proposed settlement a compromise figure. They said the only detail remaining was when the city would make the lump-sum payment.

“We felt it was in the best interest of our client to get this thing resolved,” said attorney Brian Panish, who represented Rastello. “We’ve been searching for the truth for seven years . . . and this settlement is unequivocal admission by the city that the Police Department needs a major shake-up.”

In discussing why Torrance would settle, City Atty. Kenneth L. Nelson said that even if the city won its appeal at every level, the cost of carrying the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court and then conducting a new trial would be prohibitive.

“It’s going to hurt this way, but we don’t have to sell something to do it,” Nelson said. Most of the city’s share will come from reserve funds, he said.

The city wants to settle “to get this behind us,” he said, adding that there is no point in arguing that the city could have won on appeal.

“There’s some hurt still, some morale problems,” he said. “We think rather than wrestle with moral questions . . . we’re just simply going to put it behind us. We’re going to always keep our eyes on all our departments to make sure everything is handled in the best way possible.”

After the jury verdict, the city’s insurance company refused to pay the award, noting that Torrance was insured only for accidents, but that the jury’s verdict indicated the police officers had committed intentional acts.

Torrance sued the financially troubled insurance company for full payment, but last month settled for $3.5 million.

Panish said he has been pleased that the city pushed hard to settle the Rastello case once it resolved its suit with the insurance company.

“It was difficult for both sides,” he said, “but we’re very happy that it could be resolved in this manner.”