Thursday, March 04, 2004
By Daniel Sorid, Reuters

SAN FRANCISCO, California — International Business Machines Corp. has settled a lawsuit brought by a former worker who had blamed her daughter's birth defects on exposure to chemicals at an IBM plant in New York.

The settlement, whose terms were not disclosed, comes the same day jury selection was scheduled to begin in the case and less than a week after IBM prevailed in a similar employee chemical exposure suit in California.

IBM is defending itself against about 200 cancer- and birth-defect related claims brought by current and former workers, in a ongoing legal dispute that challenges the reputation of the electronics industry as clean and safe.

IBM spokesman Chris Andrews said the maintained that it held no responsibility for the birth defects of the daughter of Heather Curtis, who took a job at an IBM computer chip plant in Fishkill, New York in 1980.

Curtis' daughter, Candace, who is 23, was born with a rare brain disorder and severe physical deformities.

"The Curtis case has been concluded and dismissed," Andrews said. "IBM firmly believes, based on facts and evidence, that it had no liability in this case and its workplace did not cause the plaintiff's injuries."

Curtis' attorney, Steven Phillips, was not available to comment. IBM's statement said that neither party in the case would issue further statements.

IBM still faces trial later this year in a lawsuit brought by a former worker in Vermont whose daughter was born with severe deformities, and dozens more cancer-related cases await Big Blue in California.

Last week, a Silicon Valley jury handed IBM a major victory by dismissing the claims of two former workers who developed cancer after decades of work in an IBM computer disk plant.

Three years ago, IBM settled a $40 million lawsuit brought by the parents of a boy who was born blind and with physical deformities that prevent him from breathing through his nose or his mouth.

Attorneys who have followed the IBM cases said lawsuits involving injured children are far more difficult to defend than cases of sick adults.

"IBM does not want its name associated with severe birth defects caused to innocent children of its employees, and as such it risked severe reputational damage if the case went to trial, even if it came out in their favor," said Scott Ferrell, a defense attorney at Call, Jensen & Ferrell, whose firm has not been involved in the IBM cases.

"Any time you've got a young child and substantial damages, you are essentially taking a spin on the roulette wheel if you take it to a jury," he said.

Source: Reuters