In Hollywood and elsewhere, the bigger the blockbuster the more plentiful the sequels – even if they rarely get the accolades of the original.
Take “Rocky,” the hit movie of 1976 in which a Philadelphia palooka gets a shot at a title fight. It begat “Rocky II” and “Rocky III” and “IV” and “V,” each cannibalizing the glory of the first. By the sixth movie, Rocky was an old man and the thrill was long gone.
Or take “Roque,” the hit lawsuit of 2001 in which a San Diego developer fought City Hall and scored a spectacular knockout. To keep track of its sequels, you don't need a score card, you need a calculator.
That's because the jaw-dropping verdict that wowed audiences in “Roque” has been whittled down so far that San Diego, once on the hook for $150 million, could conceivably make some money on the deal.
Now that's entertainment!
For those of you who haven't followed every punch in the city's marathon legal scrap with Roque de la Fuente II (yes, he pronounces his first name “Rocky”), here's a recap:
Roque (Winter 2001): In the headline-grabbing original, de la Fuente won a $94.5 million judgment against San Diego and left its city attorney, Casey Gwinn, with a black eye.
De la Fuente's suit accused the city of ruining one of his many business investments, an industrial park in Otay Mesa. Before trial, the city offered to settle the case for the equivalent of $45,000. No dice.
The jury award broke down this way: $29.2 million because the city breached its development agreement with de la Fuente, and $65.3 million for “taking” his land through inverse condemnation. The judge found this “taking” occurred when the city routed trucks across his property and considered putting an airport nearby.
De la Fuente's attorney, Vincent J. Bartolotta Jr., was soon named California's trial lawyer of the year. Later developments suggest that much of the credit for this victory belonged to the Superior Court judge, Vincent P. Di Figlia.
Roque II (Fall 2001): The action shifted to Orange County after Di Figlia was removed from the case for not disclosing his personal relationship with Bartolotta (now, how did that happen?) and no other San Diego judge would take his place.
This wasn't exactly a rematch. The champ faced a new foe: the heavyweight law firm of Latham & Watkins, brought in by the city to salvage the case.
At the opening bell, the city asked that the judgment be thrown out, but only won a split decision.
The judge ordered a new trial on the breach-of-contract action, where he said Di Figlia incorrectly ruled that the statute of limitations did not apply.
The rest of the award was upheld – and boosted to $122 million once interest was added.
Meanwhile, de la Fuente was seeking $32 million in attorney fees, bringing the city's potential exposure to $154 million.
The city was on the ropes.
Roque III (2006): When the fighting resumed in Riverside before a state Court of Appeal, the city pounded away at the condemnation claim, arguing that Di Figlia erred in telling the jury that truck traffic and an unrealized airport plan amounted to a “taking” of property.
The appellate court agreed, and entered a judgment for the city. It was a staggering blow to de la Fuente, wiping away his huge award and making him liable for the city's legal fees.
Roque IV (2007): Back in San Diego, Superior Court Judge Linda Quinn heard two spin-off suits that made the same claims as the first suit – though this time the alleged damage was to other de la Fuente entities that owned land nearby.
The city showed up with a new strategy for dealing with his breach-of-contract action. It argued that de la Fuente had, in essence, botched the paperwork, specifically the claim filed as a prelude to the lawsuit.
Anyone who has sought compensation from the government knows that first you must file a claim. Once it's denied, as most are, you can sue. But fail to file that claim and your case is dead. De la Fuente filed his claims, but he evidently omitted one detail – the dates of injury – making them technically defective.
That's not the sort of deep legal maneuvering that gets a lawyer considered for the Supreme Court, but it worked for Judge Quinn. She tossed out both suits and ordered de la Fuente to pay the city $1.2 million for its legal fees.
Son of Roque (Coming Later this Year): De la Fuente won't be in the courtroom for this one, but here's where the city could turn a small profit from this ordeal.
The city has sued one of its insurance carriers, contending it was obligated to pay for the city's defense during this protracted mess. A federal court agreed, and now the city is bringing a bad-faith claim against the insurer for having dragged its feet so long. Executive City Attorney Don McGrath expects to win punitive damages that he said could range from $15 million to $50 million.
Roque V (Coming Soon): The last piece of the original suit – the breach-of-contract claim – is headed this spring to Quinn's courtroom, where the city again will argue you can't sue with a defective claim.
Should the city's winning streak continue – as McGrath insists it will – then the original “Roque” verdict will have been obliterated.
Which isn't to say de la Fuente hasn't filed appeals after every setback, and won't file another if he loses this time.
There are more sequels in our future. As the big-screen Rocky once said, “You stop this fight, I'll kill ya.”
Gerry Braun: (619) 542-4563; gerry.braun@uniontrib.com
