$84 Million Awarded in Maglica Case : Courts: O.C. jury sides with companion of flashlight magnate. Palimony amount may be largest in U.S. history.

In a palimony award believed to be the nation’s largest, an Orange County jury ruled Friday that flashlight mogul Anthony Maglica must pay $84 million to a woman he lived, worked and shared his name with for more than 20 years but never married.

The Superior Court jury determined that Maglica, a 64-year-old of Croatian descent, and his former companion, Claire Maglica, 60, had no oral or written agreement to equally share earnings from a former machine shop the couple successfully turned into Mag Instrument Inc., the Ontario-based maker of the popular Mag-Lite flashlight.

But the jury of eight women and four men found that Anthony Maglica lied to Claire Maglica about providing for her financially and failed to pay her proper wages as the company’s executive vice president--a position she still holds.

“They were doing this together, they were working as partners. She was entitled. Right now, she is just glad this part is over,” said Claire Maglica’s attorney, John W. Keker, who contended that Anthony Maglica owed his client $200 million--half of the company’s estimated worth.

Although the verdict was in his client’s favor, Keker said he was puzzled that the jury did not conclude there was an oral contract, which he had tried to prove during the trial.

Some jurors said they believed there was some sort of agreement between the couple but could not decide what form it took. They said they decided on the amount of the judgment after “hard, long conversations” on what her work and companionship was worth.

“As far as whether there was an agreement to share everything, that was controversial, we couldn’t decide whether that was the case or not,” said juror Juan J. Singleton, 33, a Huntington Beach engineer. “There was too much conflicting testimony about what the agreement was.”

Within hours of the verdict, lawyers for Anthony Maglica announced their intention to appeal the decision, terming it a “grave injustice.”

Anthony Maglica, who shook and appeared distraught even before the verdict was announced, declined to comment. In a prepared statement released late Friday, he said the verdict will not affect the company’s financial stability.

Claire Maglica, looking frail from weight loss during the case, also left the courthouse without speaking, much to the chagrin of more than 25 reporters, photographers and camera crews jostling for interviews in a case that has gained nationwide attention.

Dennis M. Wasser, Anthony Maglica’s attorney, said he believes the verdict was wrong because jurors decided the case as if California law recognized common-law marriage--which it does not. They simply felt sorry for Claire Maglica, he said, and gave her the money.

“It was a matter of a defendant having a lot of money, a lady who was 60 years old, and the jury thinking there is enough money to go around,” Wasser said.

But juror Singleton disagreed. “It was never our motive to see how much we could take from him or give her, but to be fair with all the given evidence,” he said.

Lisa Staight, a family law attorney in Newport Beach, said that even if the jury’s decision is upheld on appeal, it is unlikely to have a widespread impact, since so few palimony cases come to court.

But Staight and Prof. Linda Chapin, who specializes in contract and family law at the Fullerton campus of Western State University School of Law, said the case should send a very strong message to co-habitating couples: Get everything in writing.

“It’s extremely risky to be relying on an oral agreement,” Chapin said. “It will come down to a ‘he said-she said’ situation,” Staight said.

All the lawyers involved in the case, as well as legal experts who followed the proceedings, said they believe the award is the largest ever in a palimony case.

The verdict is the latest twist in the story of a couple who achieved rags-to-riches success, only to end up battling in court over the multimillion-dollar business.

Claire and Anthony Maglica shared the same Anaheim Hills home, and the same name, for more than 20 years. Working together, they transformed a humble machine shop into the successful Mag Instrument Inc., makers of the lightweight Mag-Lite flashlights that have proved especially popular among police officers.

The couple hobnobbed with Presidents Reagan and Bush, became generous patrons of the Republican Party and made headlines last year as they rescued a blind boy from Bosnia and brought him to California for medical care.

During the trial, Claire Maglica told the jury that she and Anthony vowed repeatedly during their years together to live “out of one pocket”--a commitment she said dated back to a weekend getaway to Palm Springs in May, 1971.

Based on those commitments, Claire Maglica said she trusted that everything they owned, they owned together, even though their many homes and all the stock of Mag Instrument Inc. was only in Anthony Maglica’s name. She said that trust was shattered in January, 1992, when she caught him trying to transfer stock into the names of his four children from a previous marriage.

In July, 1993, Claire Maglica filed her lawsuit seeking half the $400 million she says the flashlight company is worth. Claire Maglica is the company’s executive vice president, Anthony is the president and sole shareholder.

Claire Maglica did not move from the home she shared with Anthony Maglica until March, one week before the trial began at the Santa Ana courthouse. The tale of their anguished battle was broadcast live nationwide on Court TV, and network officials said the proceedings prompted hundreds of calls from viewers taking sides in the dispute.

Claire Maglica testified that the couple had made a private commitment to share everything. Anthony Maglica asserted that he never promised Claire anything and that she had knowingly signed a property agreement stating that the company was his.

Jurors did not believe either story, however, but awarded the judgment anyway. They also found that a written contract Anthony said the couple signed in 1977 vowing never to merge their assets was unenforceable, because it “lacked consent due to fraud, duress, or undue influence.”

Anthony Maglica said he was burned financially by divorce once, and vowed in its wake never again to loosen his grip on his assets, particularly his business.

He testified that in 1977, after actor Lee Marvin’s onetime companion, Michelle Triola, won a large settlement in a landmark lawsuit that coined the term “palimony,” he and Claire signed an agreement vowing to always keep their property separate. He contends that Claire broke their agreement by setting up a joint bank account behind his back in 1989, and filed a countersuit that sought $385,000 back from her.

“There was one pocket,” Wasser told jurors. “And that pocket was picked.”

But jurors ruled in favor of Claire on that issue as well, rejecting Anthony’s claim for reimbursement.

Anthony Maglica, a balding man with bushy gray sideburns, sobbed on the witness stand and vowed to provide for Claire forever, “so help me God,” although he insisted he has no legal obligation to do so.

It was a key point in the testimony, one that helped jurors decide the award, because they said it made it clear to them that he had promised to care for Claire and still stood by that promise.

Claire, a pale, fragile-framed woman with a sharp New York accent, also broke down in tears in front of jurors, recounting the humiliation she suffered living for more than two decades out of wedlock, all the while believing that she was entitled to half of everything they shared.

She testified that she recalled signing something in the couple’s kitchen in 1977 but said she believed the document said they would marry someday, and that Anthony never raised the issue again until after she filed the lawsuit.

Wasser also dismissed the “alleged oral agreement” that Claire Maglica referred to as nothing but “pillow talk.”

During the trial, Keker portrayed Anthony Maglica as an egotist and a liar who denied in depositions of ever referring to Claire as his wife publicly, although myriad other accounts contradicted that assertion.

Defense witnesses for Anthony Maglica told a different story. Wasser sought to depict Claire as a greedy, big-spender who loved fine clothing and high-class hotels and worked far less than Anthony at the company. He told the jury that she altered credit-card statements at the company to rake in dramatically larger reimbursements than she was owed.

She also made $1.7 million in her years at Mag, an ample salary for the kind of work she did, a defense witness testified. Claire’s attorneys countered that she made only $1 million, far less than she should have earned.

“There’s no evidence on the record to support that kind of verdict,” Wasser said as he left the courtroom Friday.

After returning with their verdict, jurors told news reporters that they were saddened by the case that started with love and ended with a legal war over money. Juror Julia L. Dill of Santa Ana noted that today is the day the Maglicas, according to Claire’s testimony, always called their anniversary.

“I felt that it was a heart-wrenching case. This was a story about two people who were deeply in love,” Dill said. “I’m extremely saddened that their differences had to end up in a court of law.”

Times staff writer Anna Cekola contributed to this report.

Maglica vs. Maglica

Claire Maglica

Born: New York, 1934

Family background: Says she had an abusive, alcoholic mother who put all five daughters in an orphanage during their teen years, keeping only her three sons with her.

First marriage: To Stephen Halasz, in 1954; she filed for divorce in 1972; three children.

Business: In early 1960s, started a business called Claire Halasz Industrial Design. In 1971, after moving to Southern California, began working for May Co. as a decorator. When Anthony Maglica saw her picture in a newspaper ad, he asked her to help decorate his small machine shop. She later worked with him at Mag Instrument Inc. and is now the company’s executive vice president.

Quotable: “Tony told me we were one pocket. We’d make it. We’d eat beans together if we had to, but we’d do it together.”

Anthony Maglica

Born: New York, 1930

Family background: Mother and longshoreman father were Croatian immigrants. Returned in 1932 with his mother to a little island in the Adriatic Sea his family had called home for generations. Unable to leave during World War II, he and his mother earned a living by selling salt and making wooden scrub brushes.

First marriage: In 1950 in Croatia. Couple returned to the United States in 1950 with their first child. Divorced in 1971; four children.

Business: Eked out a living in the United States at a sewing factory, then in machine shops. In 1955, he opened his own shop, which eventually blossomed into the multimillion-dollar Mag Instrument Inc. He is company president.

Quotable: “The only time I went to bed was when I could no longer stand on my feet,” he said of his early years. “I built that business with my blood. I built that business with my sweat. I gave up a lot.”

SHE SAYS

She and Anthony vowed repeatedly since they met in 1971 to share everything. After she caught him trying to transfer stock into his children’s names in January, 1992, she decided he had breached that oral agreement and she filed a palimony lawsuit.

HE SAYS

Burned by divorce, he vowed never to marry again in order to protect his assets. In 1977, after actor Lee Marvin’s companion won a settlement in the landmark case that coined the term “palimony,” Anthony and Claire signed an agreement vowing never to merge their assets. Claire broke it by setting up a joint bank account behind his back in 1989. After she filed her lawsuit, he filed a counter-complaint, saying he wants $385,000 back.

AT STAKE

Claire Maglica is seeking half the value of Mag Instrument Inc., a 600-employee flashlight manufacturing company in Ontario she says is worth $400 million. The company is known worldwide for the Mag-Lite flashlights favored by police and earthquake-conscious Californians.

Researched by LEE ROMNEY / Los Angeles Times