MLM Counties News. Notices. Need-to-know Information.
Attorneys for the former owners of the Doe Run lead smelter in Herculaneum are working hard to get a $358.5 million verdict thrown out or reduced.
Last week lawyers for Fluor Corp., A.T. Massey Coal Co. and Doe Run Investment Holding Corp., all part of the former Doe Run Co. Partnership, filed six post-trial motions — totaling 204 pages — asking St. Louis Circuit Judge Dennis Schaumann for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, a new trial, an amended judgment and reductions in the amount of the compensatory and punitive damage awards.
The plaintiffs, 16 people who as children lived near the smelter, alleged lead emissions from the smelter caused them to suffer from attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder and to lose IQ points. Some have also been diagnosed with depression and asthma.
The defendants were represented by Armstrong Teasdale’s John H. “Jack” Quinn, Thomas Weaver and several other lawyers from the firm. Weaver said Friday the lawyers had no comment. Fluor spokesman Brian Mershon had no comment.
Plaintiffs’ lawyer Mark Bronson, of Newman Bronson & Wallis, also could not be reached for comment Friday afternoon.
Despite one motion asking the judge to enter a defense judgment and another asking for a new trial, the defendants seem willing to pay some money to the plaintiffs.
One of two motions seeking reduced punitive damages includes this statement: “Defendants pray for the Court to order a new trial on the issues of liability and damages unless Plaintiffs agree to a remittitur of punitive damages.”
The motion goes on to assert punitive damages paid by Fluor should be no more than the ultimate award of compensatory damages, which the defense also argues should be reduced by the amounts of settlements with other defendants and reduced in accordance with the companion motion for remittitur. A.T. Massey and DRIH should not be liable for punitive damages because making them pay is duplicative of the award Fluor is liable for, the defense argues.
But in the motion to amend the judgment, the defendants say the judge should reduce the punitive damage award from $20 million per plaintiff — there were 16 — to $18 million, which the plaintiffs would share. The gist of the defendants’ argument is that the current verdict punishes the defendants for identical conduct against different plaintiffs.
The jury assessed $15 million in punitive damages against Fluor, $3 million against A.T. Massey and $2 million against DRIH for each plaintiff. The defense also argues the $2 million against DRIH is duplicative, having already been included in the verdict against Fluor.
“If DRIH has no existence separate from Fluor, as Plaintiffs claimed, the punitive damages of $2 million against DRIH should be eliminated or subtracted from the amount assessed against Fluor,” the defense lawyers argue.
Part of the argument for a new trial is that the plaintiffs’ lawyers were allowed to mention during jury selection that half of any punitive damages awarded would go to the state of Missouri’s Tort Victims Compensation Fund.
The defense lawyers called the compensatory awards “excessive and unreasonable” and said a new trial is required unless the plaintiffs agree to “a substantial remittitur” of the awards.
The defendants would reduce the total compensatory damages to nearly $15.1 million, a difference of $23.4 million. Plaintiff Gabe Farmer would still receive the largest amount, although it would go from $3 million to $1.2 million. Eight plaintiffs would receive less than $1 million under this scenario, and all but two of those were actually awarded more than $2 million.
It’s difficult to imagine the plaintiffs’ lawyers agreeing to the defendant’s proposed compensatory and punitive verdicts, which total roughly $33 million — $5 million less than the amount the jury awarded for compensatory damages alone and $325 million less than the combined jury verdict.
In the motion for a JNOV, the defendants argue Schaumann should set aside the jury verdicts and enter a judgment in their favor based on the structure of the partnership. The motion states that in the 13 years Fluor owned St. Joe Minerals Corp., the smelter was operated by St. Joe or the Doe Run Co. Fluor was a member of the Doe Run Co. Partnership for less than a day, having bought Homestake Lead Co. of Missouri’s partnership interest on May 25, 1990, and then transferred it to Leadco the same day.
In addition, A.T. Massey was a wholly owned subsidiary of St. Joe and DRIH was a wholly owned subsidiary of A.T. Massey, the motion states. The defense lawyers argued that the evidence presented at trial merely showed a normal parent-subsidiary relationship existed between Fluor and St. Joe.
They also argued that the liability of each defendant should be limited to the period during which they were part of the partnership: May 25, 1990, for Fluor; Oct. 31, 1988, to April 4, 1989, for A.T. Massey; and April 4, 1989, to March 25, 1994, for DRIH.
The case is Alexander et al. v. Fluor Corp. et al., 22052-09567.
Related links:
Defendants’ motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (PDF)
Defendants’ alternative joint motion for new trial (PDF)
Defendants’ alternative motion for remittitur of compensatory damages (PDF)
Defendants’ alternative motion for remittitur of punitive damages (PDF)
