Studer Community Institute

Famous lawyer frustrates friend and foe alike

October 21, 2014
/ William Rabb
/ community-dashboard

A decade ago, Don Stewart became one of the best-known trial lawyers in the country after his team won a $700 million judgment against Monsanto Co. for decades of PCB pollution in Anniston, Ala. Stewart, a former U.S. senator from Anniston, was credited for his exhaustive examination of company records to show that Monsanto knew the dangers for decades, but did little to correct them or warn the public. The case took more than six years and involved more than 3,500 plaintiffs and dozens of expert witnesses. The jury took just a few hours to unanimously award the verdict. In the Pensacola PCB case against Monsanto and others, though, Stewart and his co-counsel's actions have raised eyebrows in the local legal community, particularly after the lawyers asked an Escambia County Circuit judge to remove herself from the case – six years into it. In other ways, Stewart has failed to communicate on key points, frustrating his own associates and others alike. “That's why I withdrew from the case, because he never would call me back,” said Pensacola attorney Sam Bearman. “I like the guy, but you have to be able to communicate.” Until Stewart agreed to handle the case, plaintiffs said they had trouble finding a local lawyer to take it, probably because of the expense involved in hiring experts and the years-long commitment the case would take. Stewart, who is not a member of the Florida Bar, associated Bearman as the local lawyer when the case was filed in 2008. Bearman is a well-regarded litigator, and was one of the lead attorneys in the recent ConocoPhillips (Agrico Chemical Co.) cases that settled for more than $70 million and paid more than 3,000 Pensacola homeowners several thousand dollars each because of groundwater contamination. The local PCB case, John Allen et al vs. Monsanto et al, is similar to the Anniston case, and charges that Monsanto and its successors polluted Escambia Bay and River, and are continuing to allow the cancer-causing chemicals to drain off the plant site north of Pensacola. The plaintiffs are asking for monetary damages, but also for a cleanup of the river and bay, a process that could cost hundreds of millions of dollars. “I thought it was a very meritorious case,” said Bearman. After Bearman left the case, Stewart associated Pensacola lawyer Steven J. Baker. This summer, Baker and Stewart took a step that is extremely rare and is considered highly risky for any lawyer: They asked the judge in the case to step down – in the middle of the case. The grounds: Circuit Judge Jan Shackelford appeared to repeatedly favor the defense attorneys in court hearings and was rude, demeaning and disparaging to plaintiffs' lawyers, in and out of court. As an example, Baker related a recent incident when he and his wife stopped to speak to Shackelford at a local restaurant. The judge apparently was not friendly. Outside, Baker's wife asked why the judge appeared to dislike Baker so much, the motion reads. “The continued and repetitive incidents taken together lead to the inescapable conclusion that the court is biased and prejudiced, creating a well-founded fear that plaintiffs cannot receive a fair trial on the merits,” reads Stewart's and Baker's July motion to recuse. Shackelford denied the motion, saying it failed to contain allegations that would give the appearance of an unfair trial. Since then, the judge has shown fewer signs of rudeness or bias, according to the court record. In fact, she soon after ruled against the Monsanto defense lawyers on two key points: Remediation, or a possible cleanup of the bay, would not be removed from consideration; and the testimony of one of the plaintiffs' chief expert witnesses would be allowed.

Back to Blogs

Famous lawyer frustrates friend and foe alike

Recent Posts