Huge Pollution Verdict May Not Stand, Lawyer Says

The plaintiffs’ lead attorney in a toxic pollution lawsuit that two weeks ago led to an unprecedented $760-million punitive damage verdict for 38 past and present Lockheed workers has sent a letter to his clients saying the verdict may not stand.

“The purpose of this letter really is to tell each of you that at this time, we have no idea what will happen with these verdicts,” wrote Los Angeles trial attorney Thomas V. Girardi.

In any event, he warned, appeals of the verdicts against five major oil and chemical companies--Exxon, Unocal, Shell, Ashland and du Pont--”will go on for several years,” and his clients should not be expecting any monetary awards soon.

Girardi noted that it is possible that the trial judge, Richard C. Hubbell of the Los Angeles Superior Court, may “take away the award” in future court proceedings.

But he also noted in the letter, dated Aug. 14, that the defendants “have already started their [appeals] campaign by ridiculing the trial judge and accusing him of bias.”

Hubbell stirred critical comment in legal circles even beyond the defense by urging the jury before deliberations began to “send a notice out to the world” with a large verdict for the workers based in Burbank.

Girardi’s letter was not released publicly, but was obtained by The Times from one of his clients.

Girardi did not return calls Thursday asking for comment.

But his letter follows complaints made to the California Bar Assn. and Gov. Pete Wilson by at least two of hundreds of plaintiffs in the case--which is being heard in many phases--that Girardi has withheld information from the plaintiffs about the distribution of earlier settlement money.

One of the plaintiffs, who spoke Thursday on condition of anonymity, said he and other plaintiffs recently met with Girardi to break out clearly what they were getting from the previous settlements months and years ago as compared with the attorneys fees he was taking.

The man said Girardi had become angry and forcefully reminded the plaintiffs that they had one of the nation’s leading attorneys in him.

In his letter, Girardi, referring to a compensatory damage award of $25.4 million that came a week before the huge punitive damage award, told his clients that the average verdict would amount to “approximately $100,000 each,” but there would be a “two-year appellate process” first.

*

Dividing $25.4 million among 38 plaintiffs in this phase of the case would come to about $600,000 per person, minus about $240,000 in attorneys fees. Girardi’s letter did not explain how the $100,000 figure he had given in the letter would be consistent.

The lead defense attorney for the oil and chemical companies, Laurence F. Janssen, commenting on Girardi’s letter, said that “the views stated that the punitive damage award may not stand are accurate but understated.”

“In my view, the punitive damage award will not stand, period,” he said. “The remainder of the letter is simply self-serving spin by Mr. Girardi.”

In another letter to plaintiffs obtained by The Times, dated Feb. 18, one of the private judges who has been involved in deciding distributions of settlements in earlier phases of the case--retired Superior Court Judge Jack Tenner--lauded Girardi’s law firm for its handling of the case.

Tenner said he and another private judge, Jack Goertzen, “want to compliment the law firm of Girardi and Keese for its undying efforts on your behalf.”