Now They Want a Third Trial - Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and the University of California Request a New Trial in Kotla Case

OAKLAND, Calif., April 21  On March 23, 2005, an Alameda County jury awarded Dee Kotla $2,127,000.00 in a wrongful termination claim which arose out of her termination because she testified against the Lab in a sexual harassment case. (Dee Kotla v. Regents of the University of California, et al., Case No. CV014799). This case received widespread publicity at the time of the verdict.The verdict was the second that the plaintiff Dee Kotla had obtained against the Lab. In March of 2002, she received a verdict of $1,000,000.00 in her favor and was awarded attorney's fees. The University of California (UC) and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (Lab) appealed that verdict and it was reversed and sent back for a new trial in January, 2004. The second trial took approximately 6 weeks and started on February 10, 2005 and concluded on March 23, 2005. On April 20, the Lab filed a motion for a new trial and a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (asking the Judge to throw out the jury verdict and enter a judgment in their favor). The hearing on the motion for new trial will be set before the trial judge, the Honorable Patrick J. Zika, in Department 135 on May 27, 2005 at 2:00 p.m.Gary Gwilliam, the attorney for Dee Kotla, stated as follows: UC and the Lab have now lost this case twice.  The second trial cost them twice as much as the first trial.  In addition, they have to pay all of plaintiff's attorneys fees for 2 trials and an appeal, as well as their own attorney's fees.  Now they want a third trial!This is ridiculous.  They will do no better in a third trial then they have done in the first two trials and this case continues to bean outrageous waste of public funds and an unnecessary burden on the courts.  They have still have made no attempt to pay off this verdict or meet with the plaintiff to resolve it.We believe that The Regents of the University of California, the Lawrence Livermore National Lab and the Department of Energy (who ultimately will pay the bill) should be ashamed of themselves for continuing this unnecessary litigation. Ms. Kotla did nothing wrong. She was only a witness in the case. They contended that she had $4.30 in unauthorized telephone calls and misused her computer. This contention has been rejected by 2 juries and a judge (the Judge in the first case denied a new trial).This termination occurred 8 years ago in February, 1997. It is time to bring this matter to a close. This case is a terrible example of the on-going harassment, intimidation, and financial waste that UC and the Lab engage in with regard to legitimate cases by their employees.For further information on the case, including earlier press releases and newspaper publicity, please contact our office.The Lab has also been held responsible in numerous other cases, including a $15 million settlement for the women at the Lab who contended that they were paid less than the men, other whistleblower cases, disability discrimination, etc