Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, August 8, 1995 TAG: 9508080090
SECTION: BUSINESS PAGE: B-8 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: F.J. GALLAGHER STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
"We had hoped to get more," said James Joyce, Roanoke attorney representing William C. Cadd in his suit against United Technologies Corp. of Hartford, Conn. "I think it was a compromise."
The decision followed nearly two weeks of testimony before Judge Jackson L. Kiser.
United Technologies, a diversified maker of industrial products including jet engines and heating and air-conditioning equipment, last month reported sales of $11.18 billion in the first half of this year. The company is considering appealing the decision, according to its attorney, Donald H. Dawson of Detroit.
Originally, Cadd's lawyers had sought $1 million in damages, in addition to medical and legal expenses. But after amending the suit to seek $5 million, Cadd's lawyers asked the jury to award him $2 million for negligence and breach of warranty.
Cadd filed his suit against United Technologies in September 1992 in connection with an explosion that occurred at Salem's Shenandoah Industrial Rubber Co. on Dec. 5, 1990. Cadd and another worker, Harry Young, were applying an industrial adhesive called Topcoat to the interior of a large steel tank manufactured by Shenandoah. Although expert witnesses disagreed about how the substance ignited, none disputed the fact that a large fireball swept through the tank, severely injuring the two men.
Both men filed suit against United Technologies separately, and in October 1993, a Roanoke jury awarded Young $4 million.
In his closing statement, Joyce accused United of "gambling" with workers' lives by failing to provide adequate information about how to use Topcoat safely. Two or three cups of the adhesive, he said, has the explosive power of 10 pounds of TNT.
"Knowing how dangerous Topcoat is, you would think they'd be very careful to give adequate warnings," Joyce told the jury. "But they didn't. The critical point is to know the risk. We didn't have an opportunity to know that risk."
Dawson, the company's lawyer, argued that thousands of people had used the product safely. He also emphasized that several of the witnesses offered conflicting testimony about the sequence of events leading up to the blast.
"You have a whole lot of evidence - people who have changed their story under oath," Dawson said. "But the fact is, they didn't do the most simplistic of things to prevent an explosion."
Juror Gary Goad said after the trial that Cadd "was suing the wrong people. It seemed that Shenandoah was more at fault than United Technologies."
Virginia's workers' compensation law bars an employee from suing his employer for injuries sustained on the job.
by CNB