Judge Rejects Claims Lockheed Caused Cancer

Dealing a potential blow to the legal claims of thousands of Burbank-area residents, a state judge has rejected allegations that Lockheed Martin caused cancer and other illnesses when it released toxic chemicals into ground water and soil during decades of defense manufacturing.

In a test case involving 140 plaintiffs, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Carl J. West ruled late Tuesday that they had failed to provide acceptable evidence or witnesses to back up their contention that Bethesda, Md.-based Lockheed Martin was responsible for their ailments.

“Lockheed provides three epidemiological studies that show the cancer incidence in Burbank is not statistically higher than the rest of Los Angeles County,” West wrote in a 49-page ruling. “Plaintiffs provide no epidemiological study.”

The decision could prove to be a crushing setback for the larger case involving more than 3,000 residents who also are suing Lockheed and five small Burbank businesses over toxic contamination to neighborhoods surrounding the site of the famed Skunk Works defense plant.

The plaintiffs’ lawyers were undeterred by the decision, saying they would ask the trial judge to limit his ruling to the 140 plaintiffs, and file an appeal. West set a hearing later this month to decide whether to rule in favor of Lockheed in all of the remaining cases.

“We view the case as alive and well,” said Allan A. Sigel, one of the plaintiffs’ attorneys. “We simply have a disagreement with the interpretation of the scientific evidence. We hope, by appellate review, to correct that misinterpretation.”

Lockheed Martin spokeswoman Gail Rymer said the plaintiffs didn’t do the work necessary to prove their case, evidenced by the judge’s exclusion of their expert witnesses and their failure to counter Lockheed’s epidemiological studies.

“The plaintiffs have said they are sick because of Lockheed Martin,” Rymer said. “If anything, however, the judge’s decision shows they did not present any credible evidence to that effect and that all along, there was no greater cancer risk in Burbank as a result of Lockheed’s operations.”

Cancer-causing compounds were first discovered in the ground water and soil beneath the company’s Burbank industrial sites in 1980. Eight years later, extensive monitoring and testing by federal, state and local agencies revealed the water to be undrinkable and the soil toxic.

Lockheed and other companies agreed in 1992 to pay $265 million to clean up toxic compounds originally used as solvents, such as perchloroethylene, trichloroethylene and hexavalent chromium.

Thousands of residents blamed the defense firm for alleged health problems and declining property values they attribute to the now-closed facility’s discharge of carcinogens and other hazardous substances.

The first toxic tort lawsuits were filed in 1996, after Lockheed secretly paid out $60 million in an out-of-court settlement to nearly 1,300 residents for health problems resulting from toxic exposure.

Since then, a total of 27 cases involving more than 3,100 residents have been filed in state court against Lockheed and five area businesses.

The main issue is whether cancer and other ailments were caused by more than 30 different toxic chemicals the plaintiffs claimed were discharged by Lockheed and the other businesses into ground water and air in Burbank during its 63 years of operation near the city’s airport.

To make the litigation more manageable, the judge consolidated the cases into one, then pulled out the 140 plaintiffs for the test case. In it, their lawyers were limited by the judge to arguing claims against Lockheed involving the three most toxic of the 33 chemicals they had alleged caused injury.

“Since the court found no causation for only these three chemicals, this doesn’t prejudge whether the remaining chemicals used by Lockheed indeed caused cancer or any other injury to the remaining 2,400 plaintiffs,” said attorney Thomas G. Foley Jr., who represents the plaintiffs.

“They are entitled under due process to have their day in court,” Foley said, maintaining that Tuesday’s ruling should apply only to the first 140 plaintiffs in the test case, not to the thousands of other plaintiffs.

Throughout the past few months, the judge has slowly whittled away the plaintiffs’ case, having already dismissed claims alleging property damage, battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

On Tuesday, West granted Lockheed’s motions to exclude key plaintiffs’ witnesses and expert testimony, saying they did not prove causation.

To do so, the plaintiffs would have had to prove their injuries were caused by Lockheed’s conduct and exposure to sufficiently high levels of the toxins.

Tuesday’s court decision was the second significant court victory for Lockheed Martin this year related to the Burbank site.

In January, the aerospace giant reached a court settlement with the U.S. government, which agreed to pay Lockheed Martin half of the $265 million it spent since 1992 to clean up Burbank contamination.

Lockheed Corp., the precursor to Lockheed Martin, was established in Burbank in 1928. In its heyday, it employed nearly 100,000 and turned out aircraft for World War II and the Cold War, including the P-38 fighter, U-2, SR-71 Blackbird spy planes and the F-117A Stealth fighter.

The Burbank site was the home of the legendary Skunk Works, which designed advanced military planes. Lockheed began closing its Burbank facility in the late 1980s and moved manufacturing to Palmdale and Marietta, Ga. The company merged with Martin Marietta Corp. in 1995 to become Lockheed Martin.