SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 8-K
CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of
The Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Date of Report: September 30, 1994
UNOCAL CORPORATION
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware 1-8483 95-3825062
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
(State or other jurisdiction of (Commission (I.R.S. Employer
incoroporation or organization) File Number) Identification No.)
1201 West Fifth Street, Los Angeles, California 90017
- ----------------------------------------------------------------
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)
Registrant's telephone number, including area code:(213) 977-7600
<PAGE>
ITEM 5. OTHER EVENTS
The attached complaint was filed on September 22, 1994.
ITEM 7. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITS
(c) Exhibits
1. Text of the complaint as referenced in Item 5
to this report.
<PAGE>
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirement of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on
its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
UNOCAL CORPORATION
------------------
(Registrant)
By: /s/ CHARLES S. MCDOWELL
-----------------------
(Charles S. McDowell,
Vice President and Comptroller)
Dated: September 30, 1994
- -------------------------
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 1
----------
SCOTT EDWARD COLE, ESQ. (Bar No. 160744)
LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT EDWARD COLE
2325 Clement Avenue, Suite 210
Alameda, California 94501
Telephone: (510) 522-2605
Facsimile: (510) 841-5501
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
CALLI SANTOS, et al.
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
CALLI SANTOS, SUSANNE
BRAGG, LEO DESROCHERS,
VALERIE VEGA-WRIGHT,
KAREN GREATHOUSE, RACHEL
SITEA, ROBERT H. WILLIAMS, CLASS ACTION
TONY BREWSTER, KAREN ------------
BREWSTER, MICHELLE COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR:
PATTERSON, RAY ROHME,
RALPH WISE, SHELLY MOTTER, 1) NEGLIGENCE;
NANCY SOUZA, KAREN 2) PUBLIC NUISANCE;
JORDON, ROSEMARY 3) PRIVATE NUISANCE;
MARANGONI, WAYNE NECKEL, 4) STRICT LIABILITY FOR
DOUG SKOG, FRANK ULTRAHAZARDOUS ACTIVITY;
HAGEMAN, GABRIELLE 5) TRESPASS;
FITZMAURICE-KENDRICK, 6) NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF
VERA KOPPERUD, JOHN EMOTIONAL DISTRESS;
HANKINS, NANCY HARWOOD 7) INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF
ANNETTE McDONALD EMOTIONAL DISTRESS;
MICHAEL SLACK, FRANCES 8) ATTORNEYS' FEES PURSUANT TO
DAHL, on behalf of themselves, and CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL
all others similarly situated, PROCEDURE SECTION 1021.5.
PLAINTIFFS,
V.
UNOCAL CORPORATION,
UNOCAL PETROLEUM
PRODUCTS AND CHEMICALS
DIVISION, and DOES 1 through
1
<PAGE>
500 inclusive,
Defendants.
- --------------------------------
Plaintiffs represent, complain and allege as follows:
PLAINTIFFS
----------
1. As used throughout this class action complaint, the term
"Plaintiffs" and/or "Class" refers to each and every named
plaintiff, and each and every person eligible for membership in
the plaintiff class as described and defined below.
2. The Plaintiff Class consists of all members who have been
exposed, in any way, to the chemical substances (including the
chemical trade named "Catacarb" and any of its breakdown
products) as a result of the releases of said chemical substances
by Unocal Refinery in Rodeo, as further identified below, between
at least August 22, 1994 and September 6, 1994 and who were
damaged in some manner by said releases.
3. At all times herein relevant, representative plaintiffs were
and now are persons within the class of persons described and
defined above.
4. Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of themselves and as
a class action pursuant to California Code of Civil procedure
section 382, on behalf of all persons or entities similarly
situated and proximately damaged by the toxic release, as
described further herein.
5. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that the class has
thousands of members and as such is so numerous that joinder of
all members of the class in a single action is impracticable.
2
<PAGE>
6. Plaintiffs and the class members share a community of
interests in that there are numerous common questions of fact and
law which predominate over any questions solely affecting
individual members, including:
a) whether Defendants committed and/or participated in the
acts alleged;
b) whether Defendants breached duties of care;
c) whether Defendants acted recklessly and/or willfully;
d) whether Defendants committed violations of law;
e) whether Defendants by their ownership, management,
control, storage and transportation of an ultra-
hazardous substance are absolutely liable, regardless
of fault for damages or injuries and losses arising
from the toxic releases;
f) whether Defendants are strictly liable;
g) whether Defendants' conduct constitutes trespass; and
h) whether Plaintiffs collectively are entitled to
prospective equitable and injunctive relief.
7. The named plaintiffs in this class action are adequate
representatives of the class, in that these plaintiffs' claims
are typical and these plaintiffs have the same interests in the
litigation of this case on their behalf. These named plaintiffs
are committed to vigorous prosecution of this case, and have
retained competent counsel experienced in litigation of this
nature. These named plaintiffs are not subject to any individual
defenses unique from those conceivably applicable to the class as
a whole. These named plaintiffs anticipate no management
difficulties of the litigation.
DEFENDANTS
----------
8. At all times herein relevant, Defendant UNOCAL CORPORATION
(hereinafter referred to as "UNOCAL"), Defendant UNOCAL PETROLEUM
PRODUCTS AND CHEMICALS DIVISION (hereinafter referred to as
"UNOCAL PETROLEUM") and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, were and
are corporations, duly licensed and located and doing business
in, but not limited to, the city of Rodeo, in the County of
Contra Costa, in the State of California. In Rodeo, California,
UNOCAL and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, operate a chemical
manufacturing facility (hereinafter referred to as a "refinery").
3
<PAGE>
9. At all times herein relevant, defendants UNOCAL, UNOCAL
PETROLEUM and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, owned and operated a
facility known as the "Unocal San Francisco Refinery" in the City
of Rodeo, California. Defendants UNOCAL, UNOCAL PETROLEUM and
DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, were and are engaged in the
business of, but not necessarily limited to, producing,
manufacturing, maintaining, controlling, refining and
distributing oil and petroleum products, for profit.
10. Defendants identified as DOES 101 through 500 inclusive,
were, at all relevant times herein mentioned, officers,
directors, supervisors, agents and/or employees of defendants
UNOCAL, UNOCAL PETROLEUM and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive.
11. Plaintiffs are unaware of the true names and capacities of
those defendants sued herein as DOES 1 through 500, inclusive,
and therefore sue these defendants by such fictitious names.
Plaintiffs will seek leave of court to amend this complaint when
same are ascertained. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and
based thereon allege that each of the fictitiously named
defendants is responsible in some manner for the occurrences
herein alleged, and that Plaintiffs' injuries as herein alleged
were proximately caused by the negligent or intentional conduct.
12. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege,
that at all relevant times herein mentioned, each of the
defendants was the agent and/or employee of each of the remaining
defendants, and in doing the acts hereinafter alleged, was acting
within the course and scope of such agency and/or employment.
COMMON FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
--------------------------
13. Prior to and including August 22, 1994, defendants UNOCAL,
UNOCAL PETROLEUM and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, detected a
leak of and, thereafter, knowingly released hazardous chemicals
(including the chemical trade named "Catacarb") from their Rodeo
refinery. The chemical known as "Catacarb" is a toxic substance,
known to cause severe short-term detriment to the health of
humans and animals. One of the components of "Catacarb" is a
Vanadium compound.
4
<PAGE>
14. Vanadium is a relatively heavy metal and is commonly known
by persons employed in the refining industry to be toxic.
15. The chemical known as "Catacarb" is also composed of
Diethanolamine. Diethanolamine is also commonly known by persons
employed in the refining industry to be toxic.
16. In addition to the short-term health effects caused by
exposure to these chemicals,it is commonly known by persons
employed in the refining industry that the "fall-out" of such
airborne chemicals, including "Catacarb" and any of its breakdown
products, was likely to cause damage to personal and/or real
property and to the environment.
17. The above-described leak resulted in the airborne release of
well over 100 tons of Catacarb into the environment of the
surrounding communities of Crockett, Rodeo and Selby, California,
commencing on or about August 1994.
18. On or about August 22, 1994, defendants UNOCAL, UNOCAL
PETROLEUM and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, contacted the Contra
Costa County Health Department of notify them of the existence of
said chemical leak and the resulting chemical releases.
19. On or about this date, Defendants, and each of them, did not
notify any citizen in the Crockett/Selby/Rodeo, California areas,
except for those who were incidentally employed by defendants
UNOCAL, UNOCAL PETROLEUM and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive and/or
by the Contra Costa County Health Department, pursuant to
UNOCAL's/UNOCAL PETROLEUM's notification of the leak and release
to this entity.
20. Between at lease August 22, 1994 and September 6, 1994,
Defendants, and each of them, knew of the release of these
chemicals, including "Catacarb" and its breakdown products and
the hazardous nature thereof, yet failed to provide any notice of
said releases to the citizens of the Crockett/Selby/Rodeo,
California areas.
21. Between August 22, 1994 and September 6, 1994, Defendants,
and each of them, received numerous complaints from UNOCAL and/or
UNOCAL PETROLEUM employees and/or members of the
Crockett/Selby/Rodeo areas of symptoms of illness from the "fall-
out" of "Catacarb".
5
<PAGE>
22. Despite these numerous complaints, Defendants, and each of
them, failed to notify the citizenry of surrounding and affected
areas, from which the complaints originated, of the existence of
any chemical releases or the potential and reported effects
thereof.
23. Had the citizenry of the geographical area downwind of the
Rodeo facility of defendants UNOCAL, UNOCAL PETROLEUM and DOES 1
through 100, inclusive, been informed of the existence of said
leak(s) and releases when detected by Defendants, and each of
them, said citizenry would have been able to take protective
measures, such as avoiding said areas downwind of Defendants for
the duration of the releases or any portion thereof. Such action
by Plaintiffs, if taken, to avoid exposure to these known toxic
substances could and would have greatly reduced the health and
property damages to Plaintiffs.
24. Furthermore, despite the numerous complaints received by
Defendants and despite the known risks of exposure to these
chemicals, including "Catacarb", Defendants, and each of them
failed to take any corrective measures, such as shutting down
and/or repairing the leaking equipment/facility until September
6, 1994.
25. The above-described unabated release of these chemicals,
including "Catacarb" by Defendants, and each of them, for a
period of two weeks, and the resulting "fall-out" of these toxic
substances over the Crockett/Selby/Rodeo area has resulted in
short-term health problems for a large number of citizens of the
aforementioned communities, too numerous to identify herein.
26. Said health effects include "flu-like" symptoms such as sore
throats, coughs, eye irritation, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea,
runny noses, severe headaches, fatigue, dizziness, loss of
appetite and weight loss, and related pains. Various other
health effects experienced by Plaintiffs include, but are not
necessarily limited to, intense cramping and pain of the abdomen,
watery eyes, nose bleeds, sores to and discoloration of the lips
and inner mouth, rashes and other skin irritations on various
parts of the body, disruptions or interference with menstrual
cycles and lung irritation.
27. These health effects are, in many cases, ongoing, and are an
extreme concern to Plaintiffs.
6
<PAGE>
28. Furthermore, as the chemical substance (trade named
"Catacarb") is known and considered to be toxic, it is likely to
have caused and may continue to cause long-term health effects to
the citizenry of the aforementioned communities. As discussed
herein, Vanadium, one of the components of "Catacarb", is a heavy
metal, capable of remaining in the systems of humans and animals
for extended periods of time, if not remaining there permanently.
29. Furthermore, the resulting "fall-out" of this toxic
substance over the Crockett/Selby/Rodeo area has resulted in
damage to real and/or personal property for a number of citizens
of the aforementioned communities, too numerous to identify
herein.
30. The "fall-out" of this toxic substance has left behind a
sticky, waxy residue on Plaintiffs' property. The damage to said
real and/or personal property includes, but is not necessarily
limited to, discoloration, streaking and/or spotting of
automobile paint and spotting and streaking on the windows of
homes and vehicles. Said chemicals have invaded Plaintiffs'
living areas and are now embedded in the carpets, furniture,
clothing and other articles of Plaintiffs.
31. The settling of this toxic chemical's "fall-out" on garden
fruits and vegetables in the aforementioned geographical areas
has rendered said property unfit for consumption or has
necessitated the removal of outer layers of said fruits and
vegetables before consumption.
32. Despite a variety of efforts by Plaintiffs to remove the
residual substances from their real and/or personal property, in
many instances, these efforts were entirely unproductive,
resulting in permanent damage to the aforementioned property.
33. As a proximate result of Defendants' conduct as set forth
herein, Plaintiffs have sustained damages, as described above,
including damages to real and personal property, lost usage and
enjoyment of property, diminution of fair market value of
property, all in an amount to be established at trail, but, in no
event, in an amount less than $500,000,000.00.
34. As a further proximate result of Defendants' conduct as set
forth herein, Plaintiffs have sustained damages, as described
above, including personal injuries and/or medical and related
expenses, loss of consortium, mental anguish and other emotional
distress, loss of earnings and earning potential due to work
missed, opportunities and other benefits of employment, all in an
amount to be established at trail, but, in no event, in an amount
less than $500,000,000.00.
7
<PAGE>
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
---------------------
NEGLIGENCE
(VS. ALL DEFENDANTS)
35. Plaintiffs incorporate in this cause of action each and
every allegation of paragraphs 1 through 34, inclusive, with the
same force and effect as though fully set forth herein.
36. At all times herein relevant, Defendants, and each of them,
owed a duty of care to Plaintiffs, and each of them, to act with
reasonable care so as not to put Plaintiffs' health and safety or
the condition of these Plaintiffs' real and/or personal property
in jeopardy.
37. In releasing excessive quantities of "Catacarb" from their
facility(ies), in failing to adequately warn the foreseeable
class of Plaintiffs of the dangers of said release, in failing to
contain and/or repair any known leaks in Defendants' facility
immediately upon discovery thereof, in failing to adhere to
applicable industry standards, internal safety procedures, and/or
other applicable state or local laws, rules, regulations and
standards, and in otherwise doing the acts alleged herein,
Defendants, and each of them, did breach their general duty of
care to Plaintiffs.
38. As a proximate result of Defendants' conduct as set forth
herein, Plaintiffs have sustained damages, as set forth in
paragraphs 33 and 34 of this Complaint.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
----------------------
PUBLIC NUISANCE
(VS. DEFENDANTS UNOCAL, UNOCAL PETROLEUM AND DOES 1 THROUGH 100,
INCLUSIVE)
39. Plaintiffs incorporate in this cause of action each and
every allegation of paragraphs 1 through 38, inclusive, with the
same force and effect as though fully set forth herein.
40. The release of the chemical substance herein-described
(trade named "Catacarb") by Defendants UNOCAL, UNOCAL PETROLEUM
and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, into the air
and, in turn, upon the ground by way of "fall-out" that is the
property of the people of the State of California, constitutes a
public nuisance.
8
<PAGE>
41. This toxic substance has migrated, and continues to migrate,
into the environment, continuing to damage the natural resources
of the State of California and, thereby, depriving the people of
the State of California of the right to use and enjoy those
natural resources in their natural, uncontaminated form.
42. These defendants shamelessly committed this public nuisance
in the course of their profit making activity, and benefitted
monetarily from the inexpensive, but environmentally
irresponsible methods of controlling and securing their
facilities from releasing dangerous chemicals, as has occurred
and is described herein. Plaintiffs never consented to any of
the foregoing.
43. The nuisance effects a considerable number of persons, but
at the same time, causes special injury to Plaintiffs in that the
natural resources located within their community are affected
most greatly.
44. As a proximate result of Defendants' conduct as set forth
herein, Plaintiffs have sustained damages, as set forth in
paragraphs 33 and 34 of this Complaint.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
---------------------
PRIVATE NUISANCE
(VS. DEFENDANTS UNOCAL, UNOCAL PETROLEUM AND DOES 1 THROUGH 100,
INCLUSIVE)
45. Plaintiffs incorporate in this cause of action each and
every allegation of paragraphs 1 through 44, inclusive, with the
same force and effect as though fully set forth herein.
46. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such
information and belief, herein allege that during the time
defendants UNOCAL, UNOCAL PETROLEUM and DOES 1 through 100,
inclusive, and each of them, occupied the premises of said
refinery, Defendants occupied, used and maintained the above-
described refinery in such a manner that allowed the herein-
described toxic chemical (trade names "Catacarb"), to be released
over a two-week period, without abatement, into the environment
and onto Plaintiffs' property and into Plaintiffs' soil,
groundwater and waters of the State of California.
9
<PAGE>
47. The aforementioned occupation, use and maintenance of the
premises of these defendants constitutes a nuisance within the
meaning of California Civil Code section 3479, in that it
interfered with Plaintiffs' comfortable enjoyment of their
property and required and continues to require Plaintiffs to
incur costs by reason of their ownership of their property. The
nuisance is continuing and Plaintiffs have never consented to
said nuisance.
48. As a proximate result of the nuisance, Plaintiffs have been
deprived of the full use and enjoyment of their property and have
suffered and will continue to suffer damages by reason of
diminution in the value of their property, lost profits an
economic losses, diminution of rents from their property and
damages resulting from the stigma to their property caused by its
contaminated condition. The amount of said damages shall be in
an amount to be determined at trial, according to proof.
49. As a proximate result of Defendants' conduct as set forth
herein, Plaintiffs have sustained damages, as set forth in
paragraphs 33 and 34 of this Complaint.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
----------------------
STRICT LIABILITY FOR ULTRAHAZARDOUS ACTIVITY
(VS. DEFENDANTS UNOCAL, UNOCAL PETROLEUM AND DOES 1 THROUGH 100,
INCLUSIVE)
50. Plaintiffs incorporate in this cause of action each and
every allegation of paragraphs 1 through 49, inclusive, with the
same force and effect as though fully set forth herein.
51. In the course of the operation of said refinery, defendants
UNOCAL, UNOCAL PETROLEUM and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive,
engaged in the handling, management, storage and/or control of a
hazardous chemical (trade names "Catacarb"). Those activities
were conducted in close proximity to commercial establishments
and residences, as herein alleged.
52. The chemical (trade named "Catacarb") is composed partly of
toxic substances and/or heavy metals that are capable of doing
substantial damage to humans, animals, personal/real property and
the environment if released, in any form, into said environment.
As such, the release of "Catacarb" poses a serious health and
safety hazard to humans, animals, property and the environment.
10
<PAGE>
53. The management, control and handling of "Catacarb" are
subject to regulation by federal, state and local authorities and
require special management and handling to ensure safety.
54. Unless managed, controlled, and/or handled properly, with
sufficient safeguards imposed and adhered to, there is a
substantial likelihood that harm will occur upon the release of
"Catacarb" into the environment.
55. The handling and control of "Catacarb" in commercial
quantities is not an activity which is a matter of common usage.
56. The handling and control of "Catacarb" in commercial
quantities, as done by Defendants herein, was conducted for the
purposes of generating profits, for the direct benefit of these
defendants, and each of them.
57. The control, use and management of "Catacarb" by these
defendants, and each of them, constitutes an abnormally dangerous
activity and these defendants, and each of them, are strictly,
jointly and severally, liable for damages which result from that
activity.
58. As a proximate result of Defendants' conduct as set forth
herein, Plaintiffs have sustained damages, as set forth in
paragraphs 33 and 34 of this Complaint.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
---------------------
TRESPASS
(VS. ALL DEFENDANTS)
59. Plaintiffs incorporate in this cause of action each and
every allegation of paragraphs 1 through 58, inclusive, with the
same force and effect as though fully set forth herein.
60. Plaintiffs are and were, for all relevant times herein
mentioned, in lawful possession of certain real and personal
property in the geographical areas around and downwind from the
Unocal facility, as herein described.
61. Defendants, and each of them, engaged in the handling,
management and control of a hazardous chemical (trade named
"Catacarb") that resulted in the release and, in turn, "fall-out"
of this chemical substance onto the real and/or personal property
of Plaintiffs. Said release had the normal and foreseeable
consequence that this substance would cause damage to said
property.
11
<PAGE>
62. Defendants' continued release of "Catacarb", a toxic and
otherwise dangerous substance, was intentional.
63. Plaintiffs, at no time, consented to the intrusion of said
substance onto their respective properties.
64. As a proximate result of Defendants' conduct as set forth
herein, plaintiffs have sustained damages, as set forth in
paragraphs 33 and 34 of this Complaint.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
---------------------
NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
(VS. ALL DEFENDANTS)
65. Plaintiffs incorporate in this cause of action each and
every allegation of paragraphs 1 through 64, inclusive, with the
same force and effect as though fully set forth herein.
66. Defendants, and each of them, permitted the release of toxic
and otherwise harmful chemicals into the environment, with full
knowledge of the dangerous nature of said chemicals, and
permitted same to continue unabated for at least two weeks, with
full knowledge of the likely consequences thereof.
67. Defendants, and each of them, knew or should have known that
the result of the above-described acts would cause Plaintiffs
severe emotional distress, yet performed said acts nonetheless.
68. As a direct and proximate result of the above-described
negligent conduct of Defendants, and each of them, Plaintiffs did
suffer severe emotional distress and mental suffering. In
particular, Plaintiffs were extremely fearful for the safety,
health and welfare of themselves, their spouses and other
potentially-affected family members.
69. As a proximate result of Defendants' conduct as set forth
herein, Plaintiffs have sustained damages, as set forth in
paragraphs 33 and 34 of this Complaint.
12
<PAGE>
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
-----------------------
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
(VS. ALL DEFENDANTS)
70. Plaintiffs incorporate in this cause of action each and
every allegation of paragraphs 1 through 69, inclusive, with the
same force and effect as though fully set forth herein.
71. Defendants, and each of them, engaged in extreme and
outrageous conduct in permitting the unabated release of toxic
and otherwise harmful chemicals into the environment, with full
knowledge of the dangerous nature of said chemicals. Defendants,
and each of them, further engaged in extreme and outrageous
conduct in knowing of said release and permitting same to
continue for two weeks, all for the sake of profits to Defendants
and in blatant disregard of the health and welfare of the
citizenry of surrounding areas and the likely effects to said
citizens' real and/or personal property.
72. As a direct and proximate result of the unlawful conduct of
Defendants, and each of them, Plaintiffs did suffer severe
emotional distress and mental suffering. In particular,
Plaintiffs were extremely fearful for the safety, health and
welfare of themselves, their spouses and other potentially-
affected family members.
73. Defendants, and each of them, intended to cause or acted
with reckless disregard of the probability of causing emotional
distress to Plaintiffs.
74. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' extreme and
outrageous conduct as set forth herein, Plaintiffs have sustained
damages, as set forth in paragraphs 33 and 34 of this Complaint.
75. Moreover, in that at all times herein mentioned, Defendants,
and each of them, intended to cause or acted with reckless
disregard of the probability of causing injury to Plaintiffs, and
because these defendants were guilty of Oppressive, Fraudulent
and/or Malicious conduct, Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of
exemplary or punitive damages in an amount adequate to deter such
conduct in the future.
13
<PAGE>
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
-----------------------
ATTORNEYS' FEES PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
SECTION 1021.5
(VS. ALL DEFENDANTS)
76. Plaintiffs incorporate in this cause of action each and
every allegation of paragraphs 1 through 75, inclusive, with the
same force and effect as though fully set forth herein.
77. The reimbursement or costs and fees by Defendants, and each
of them, to Plaintiffs in responding to the release into the
environment of these hazardous chemicals (including the chemical
trade named "Catacarb") will confer a significant benefit on the
general public.
78. Plaintiffs have expended and will continue to expend
considerable costs in this action in order to recover for the
costs of remedying the release of said toxic substances. Such
costs are and will continue to be of public benefit.
79. Recovery of said costs confers a benefit on the public by
ensuring that those who benefitted from and who are directly at
fault for the release of said toxic substances into the
environment bear the full cost of such releases, and so
discourage future reckless or negligent management and control of
other substances.
80. It is in the interests of justice that Plaintiffs'
attorneys' fees not be paid out of the recovery for which the
Plaintiffs pray herein.
14
<PAGE>
WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFFS pray for relief against DEFENDANTS,
and each of them, as follows:
1. For Actual Damages, including damage to real and/or personal
property, lost usage and enjoyment of property, diminution of
fair market value of property, lost profits, lost earnings,
earning capacity and other employee benefits, and costs of
medical treatment in an amount according to proof, in no event,
in an amount less than 500,000,000.00;
2. For costs of removal of any harmful substance from
Plaintiffs' real and/or personal property and/or all other
related remedial action;
3. For Interest on the amount of any and all economic losses,
at the prevailing legal rate;
4. For Compensatory Damages, including and damages for personal
injury, emotional distress, pain, discomfort, anxiety, and mental
anguish, in an amount according to proof but, in no event, in an
amount less than 500,000,000.00;
5. For Punitive Damages in an amount appropriate to punish
Defendants, and each of them, and deter others from engaging in
similar misconduct in the future;
6. For reasonable Attorneys' Fees as provided by statute;
7. For the establishment of an emergency warning system to be
maintained by Defendants for the purpose of immediate
notification of all residents and businesses in the
Crockett/Rodeo/Selby community in the event of future chemical
releases by Defendants;
8. For Costs of suit and such other relief as the Court deems
just and proper;
Dated: September 22, 1994
Respectfully submitted,
By: /S/ Scott Edward Cole
----------------------
SCOTT EDWARD COLE, ESQ. &
TIMOTHY P. RUMBERGER, ESQ.
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
15
