FRESNO, Calif. (Legal Newsline) - Chevron must pay a $120 million verdict in California, an appeals court has ruled, despite arguments one of the jurors who handed it down was ineligible to serve on a jury.
The Fifth Appellate District in Fresno ruled on June 21 to affirm the verdict in a case over a 2011 oil well eruption that caused a sinkhole and killed a Chevron employee. TRC Operating Co. owned adjacent well fields in Kern County and sued Chevron.
A 2021 trial ended in $120 million in damages against Chevron, which later noted a juror failed to disclose a 40-year-old criminal conviction in another state, failed to register as a sex offender and failed to honestly answer a question about past involvement in other lawsuits.
"The only misconduct here was Juror No. 10's dishonesty during voir dire by failing to disclose prior court cases in which he was involved," Justice Donald Franson wrote.
"Neither of the court cases - a felony criminal case in Washington and a personal injury suit in which he was plaintiff - relate in any manner to the current case or are likely to have influenced Juror No. 10's impression of the current case."
TRC said Juror No. 10 was not ineligible because the criminal statute under which he was likely required to register as a sex offender was not listed in the juror eligibility statute, while also arguing there was no prejudice against either party.
The trial court had been swayed by Chevron's claim and ordered a new trial, but the Fifth District reversed - despite the juror's "indecent liberties" with a minor conviction in Washington State in the 1980s and his refusal to register as a sex offender when he moved to California.
Those "currently" required to register as sex offenders are prohibited from serving on juries in California. But the California legislature has set a framework for instances like Juror No. 10's, and the Fifth District ruled against Chevron's argument that the laws create "absurd results."
The felony conviction of Juror No. 10 happened in 1982, leading to 90 days in jail, therapy and five years of probation. He'd admitted to sexual contact with a minor once a week for four months. In 1987 after being released from probation, his guilty plea was changed to not guilty.
Washington did not enact mandatory sex offender registration until 1990. The Fifth District found Juror No. 10 wasn't "currently" required to register in California.
Fresno Superior Court judge David Lampe had found Juror No. 10 refused to follow instructions, was loud and opinionated and intimidated another juror from discussing TRC's own conduct in causing damages.
“Was he biased? The court is here confronted with an obstinate, untruthful, obstreperous, contemptuous, ineligible and entitled juror, refusing the orders of the court, who was loud, opinionated and intimidating in jury deliberations, and whose participation influenced the outcome," he wrote.
Juror No. 10 had not disclosed his conviction to avoid embarrassment, Lampe had said, and did not fail to understand the question or forget his past - "No one forgets such serious charges."
Plus, he'd been a party to his wife's personal injury lawsuit nine years earlier but left blank a question asking "if you or anyone close to you have ever made a claim for money damages, explain."
No matter, the Fifth District ruled.
"There is no evidence Juror No. 10's prior experiences with the courts were communicated in any way to the other jurors, much less influenced their votes or tainted them with a bias as to the parties or the issues being decided," Franson wrote.