This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Torts
Environmental Contamination
Breach of Lease

Leslie Fields, Aqua-Trek Inc., CCHI Insurance Services Inc., et al. v. 245 Partners, LLC, The Broe Companies Inc., Broe Real Estate Services, et al.

Published: Aug. 12, 2003 | Result Date: Jun. 27, 2003 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 322756 Verdict –  $767,822

Judge

Thomas J. Mellon Jr.

Court

San Francisco Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

R. Ernest Montanari


Defendant

Craig Bloomgarden


Experts

Plaintiff

S. Guy S. Puccio
(technical)

Barry R. Horn M.D.
(medical)

Clark Wallace
(technical)

Thaddeus J. Whalen Jr.
(technical)

Michael Legerski
(technical)

James S. Peacock
(technical)

Defendant

D. Robert Scofield
(technical)

Charles McDonald
(medical)

D. Paul Regan
(technical)

Charles L. Blake
(technical)

Facts

The plaintiff commercial tenants entered into a long-term lease with the building owner defendant and cross-complainant at the height of the commercial rental market in San Francisco in Spring 2000. In Fall 2000, demolition activities occurred on adjacent floors. In Spring 2002, the plaintiffs vacated the building.

Settlement Discussions

In Fall 2002, the plaintifs demanded in excess of $15 million, which demand was later reduced to $3 million prior to trial.

Result

Nonsuits in favor of defendants on all tort causes of action, including negligence, nuisance, infliction of emotional distress, fraud and breach of fiduciary duty. In Phase I, the jury found (11-1) in favor of cross-complainant 245 Partners, LLC on its breach of lease claim in the amount of $767,822. In Phase II, the court found in favor of the defendants on the Proposition 65 and Business and Professions Code section 17200 claims. In Phase III, another jury found (9-3) that the defendants were not negligent and there was no nuisance. The court granted defendants' nonsuit motions as to the remaining tort claims. Post-trial motions have been filed.

Other Information

The court divided the trial into three phases which consisted of two different juries and a court trial. The court determined that Phase I would consist of a jury trial on the cross-complaint for breach of lease, Phase II would consist of a court trial on the Proposition 65 and Business and Professions Code section 17200 claims and Phase III would consist of a jury trial as to the tort claims.

Deliberation

Phase I: one day. Phase II, two days


#110263

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390