BY TIM BONFIELD
The Cincinnati Enquirer
A proposed $4.3 million settlement for families of patients involved in Cold War radiation experiments at Cincinnati's General Hospital could be delayed again, this time because of a fight over legal fees. On Monday, Robert Newman -- the attorney representing most of the families -- filed a motion alleging unethical behavior on the part of attorneys representing a group of families who object to the settlement.
"This settlement is foundering on lawyer greed," Mr. Newman said. "Were it not for the excessive claims from these foreign lawyers for attorney fees, this case might have been settled by now."
The original class action case was filed in U.S. District Court in 1994. It involves 89 cancer patients treated between 1960 and 1972 at General Hospital (now University Hospital), plus a group of patients who were considered for radiation but apparently never treated.
The suit contends the patients received high doses of radiation as part of a military experiment to measure how soldiers would be affected by nuclear attack. The defendants have denied any wrongdoing, insisting that the radiation was a valid, accepted treatment for its time.
A proposed settlement involving payments to families, an apology from the federal government, a memorial plaque and other terms won preliminary approval last year.
But then attorneys representing a group of objecting families jumped into the case. The objectors, believing they can win bigger verdicts at trial, want to pursue their own cases. But defense attorneys have insisted all along that any settlement must be binding on all families, or no deal.
A "final" hearing to determine the fairness of the settlement was held in March. The case has been in limbo ever since.
U.S. District Judge Sandra Beckwith delayed her decision to give the opposing sides more time to work out their differences. The differences now appear to be focused on legal fees.
Mr. Newman contends objecting attorneys directly solicited families with unrealistic promises that they could do better by opting out of the settlement. Their alleged actions could be ethics code violations, and as such, the court could disqualify the attorneys from the case or reject any fees they claim, Mr. Newman said.
Mr. Newman cited an offer by Cincinnati attorney John Metz to take one woman's case for 40 percent of whatever he won in court. Eileen Schlechty said she was told she could get "millions" if she spurned her share of the settlement -- about $50,000 -- and successfully pursued her own lawsuit.
Mr. Metz, Houston attorney Richard Drubel and Philadelphia attorney Daniel Berger, all of whom represented the objecting families during the settlement hearing, could not be reached for comment Monday evening.
If a settlement is not reached, the class action could dissolve into dozens of individual cases that could take years to resolve.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
