Woman Who Sued Texaco for Bias Wins $6 Million

A Superior Court jury awarded more than $6 million to a Los Angeles woman Wednesday in a sex discrimination case against Texaco Inc., an amount that labor attorneys called the largest in the nation ever awarded to one person.

Lawyers said Wednesday that the award, which could increase Friday when the same jury will decide punitive damages, sends a strong message to large corporations about the risks of biased promotion practices.

Janella Sue Martin, who filed the suit in 1985, worked as a credit supervisor in the oil giant’s western region since 1984. She accused Texaco of passing her over twice when positions were created for the position of credit manager.

As a result, Martin said, she was paid less money than the two men who got the jobs and suffered emotionally. The 48-year-old Martin still works for Texaco as a credit supervisor and worked throughout the case.

Martin and attorneys for Texaco were tight-lipped after the jury handed down its decision, saying they did not want to comment on an ongoing case. The trial does not officially end until the jury decides on punitive damages. Deliberations begin Friday.

Dan Stormer, Martin’s attorney, predicted that Texaco, based in White Plains, N.Y., would appeal the jury’s final decision.

Joan Graff, the director of the San Francisco-based Employment Law Center and an expert on women in the workplace, said the jury decision represents a stunning victory for Martin in particular and women in general.

“It lends substance to the Department of Labor report that glass ceilings exist,” she said, in reference to a report issued this summer. “It gives women the opportunity to challenge (discriminatory employers) with more confidence.”

Graff added that the amount represented the largest in the nation for one person in a sex discrimination case.

The decision is precedent-setting in that it awards a significant amount to a middle manager of a large corporation, a group that was not represented before, said one source close to the case.

Frank Cronin, an attorney who regularly defends large corporations in cases similar to Martin’s, said the amount awarded was “grossly excessive” and an attempt to “pander to the jury.” Cronin predicted that the amount would be decreased by Superior Court Judge Ronald Cappai.