Whistle-Blower Awarded $744,000 Over Dismissal : Courts: A jury rules that the county Office of Education mistreated the analyst. He was fired after alleging that falsified data was used to justify the purchase of an $8.6-million computer.

A jury Thursday awarded $744,000 to a former computer analyst who accused Los Angeles County Office of Education officials of dismissing him after he alerted investigators about allegedly falsified data justifying the purchase of a multimillion-dollar computer system.

Allen M. Weil, 63, won the judgment for punitive damages and for wages that he lost when he was dismissed from his job in March, 1993.

The Norwalk Superior Court jury found that the county education office and three top administrators--former Assistant Supt. Calvin Hall, computer services director Jay Stevens and assistant computer services director Robert Viramontes--had harassed Weil and unfairly discriminated against him.

County Schools Supt. Stuart E. Gothold and assistant computer services director James Magill were cleared of any involvement.

The judgment did not include fees for Weil’s lawyers, estimated to be about $600,000. A decision on those will be made at a July 13 hearing.

After the verdict was read, Weil beamed at his wife and 2-year-old daughter, who stood by his side.

“I did something that I thought was my civic responsibility, and for a long time I was mistreated,” Weil said. “This verdict (says) you’ve got to encourage people to whistle-blow, but you’ve got to give them protection.”

Weil, who has been out of work since he was dismissed after being an analyst for the county for 16 years, was characterized by county officials as a vindictive malcontent.

Gothold said he was disappointed by the jury’s decision. The county’s attorney, Eric Bathen, said the trial was unfair.

“I think it’s a jury gone wild,” Bathen said, adding that he will request a new trial at a hearing July 13.

Barring a successful appeal, the decision ends a battle that began in 1991, when the Board of Education decided to purchase an $8.6-million computer to replace what administrators described as an overburdened system. The system processes payrolls for most public school districts in the county.

During the two-week trial, Weil’s attorneys argued that his superiors asked him to provide false data implying that the old computer was operating at capacity and justifying the need for a new one.

When Weil refused, the administrators prepared their own report and presented their falsified data to the county Board of Education, according to documents submitted by Weil. The board voted in January, 1991, to purchase a new computer.

The falsified data said the computer “peaked at 100% or more for periods of up to six days,” resulting in processing delays, the lawsuit stated.

Using data that Weil supplied, county auditors later concluded that the system was actually operating at between 54% and 72% of its capacity in the two years before the new computer was ordered.

Weil took his story to investigators. In his lawsuit, he contended that his superiors dismissed him for whistle-blowing, then justified his dismissal as a budget-cutting move.