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.

Employment Law
Wrongful Termination
Fraud

Maclynn R. Brinton v. TRW, Inc.

Published: Jul. 20, 1996 | Result Date: Jun. 13, 1996 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: BC107569 –  $2

Judge

Alban I. Niles

Court

L.A. Superior Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Philip J. Ganz Jr.

Laurie S. Gorsline
(Administrative Law Judge)


Defendant

Gregg C. Sindici


Experts

Plaintiff

Darryl R. Zengler M.A.
(technical)

Facts

Plaintiff Maclynn R. Brinton was a 55-year-old vice-president with defendant TRW, Inc. He had been employed by TRW and its predecessor for 26 years. In August 1991, TRW, through its group vice-president, Robert Kohler, requested that the plaintiff relocate from TRW in San Diego to TRW in Colorado Springs, Colo. (COS) and assume additional duties there as acting temporary plant manager. (The existing plant manager had resigned.) The COS plant was in financial difficulty and there was concern that the COS plant might close. The plaintiff was reluctant to move to COS. The plaintiff claimed that he met with Kohler in August 1991, before relocating to COS, and sought from him certain representations and commitments. Specifically, the plaintiff claimed he sought a commitment, in writing, that if the plaintiff moved to COS, he would always have his job at TRW even if the COS plant closed, a representation that there were no plans to close the COS plant, a representation that Kohler would make a personal appearance at an all-hands meeting at COS to assure the workers of his support for keeping the plant open and an assurance that TRW would support hiring a replacement plant manager for the COS plant. In August 1991, the plaintiff relocated to COS. Kohler never sent the plaintiff any commitment in writing and (in 1991) he never addressed any all-hands meeting at COS to assure the plant workers of TRW's support to keeping the COS plants open. In December 1991, Kohler traveled to COS and demoted the plaintiff by stripping him of the position of TRW vice president. In January 1992, the plaintiff took medical leave allegedly to recover from severe disabling depression. In the summer of 1992, TRW commenced negotiations to sell the COS plant. In September 1992, TRW sent a letter requesting that the plaintiff return all TRW property. In October 1992, the plaintiff complained to a TRW human resources manager that Kohler had reneged on the commitments allegedly made to the plaintiff in connection with the plaintiff's move to COS. Later in October 1992, a TRW human resources manager informed the plaintiff that TRW would lay off the plaintiff after the plaintiff's medical leave ended. In June 1993, TRW sold the COS plant. In June 1994, the plaintiff informed TRW that he was ready to return to work. In June 1994, TRW sent the plaintiff a letter telling him that there was no comparable jobs available in his former TRW group, but suggested that he apply for three first-level supervisor positions which were not comparable in pay, responsibilities or status to his previous position. These jobs were equivalent to the jobs the plaintiff had peformed 18 years earlier in his career. The plaintiff hired attorney to respond to TRW's letter. In July 1994, TRW informed the plaintiff that it was laying him off. The plaintiff brought this action against the defendant based on breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith theories of recovery.

Settlement Discussions

The plaintiff made a C.C.P. º998 settlement demand for $1.2 million before trial, which was increased to $1.75 million after the trial, but before the verdict. The defendant made a C.C.P. º998 offer of compromise for $250,000 just before trial.

Specials in Evidence

$747,290 $2,311,790

Damages

The plaintiff claimed $2 million to $3 million (per the plaintiff) or $2.6 million to $3 million (per the defendant) in damages for loss of earnings and employment benefits.

Other Information

The verdict was reached approximately two years after the case was filed. Mediations were held on January 12, 1995 before Stefan M. Mason and February 14, 1996, before Michael P. King. They did not resolve the matter.

Deliberation

5 days

Poll

10-2

Length

20 days


#92483

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

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