Jurors who sat through three weeks of testimony sent four separate notes telling the court they were hopelessly deadlocked 9-3 in the case where a group of 30 plaintiffs argued 3M was partially to blame for a fatal 2020 explosion.
Then, at 3 p.m. Monday, after nearly three full days of deliberation, two buzzes came through the intercom of the 11th District Courtroom in Harris County.
A verdict had been reached.
The result came a couple of hours after the court delivered an Allen charge to the panel, instructing them to carefully consider the evidence and their positions, and warning that if they could not reach a decision, another group of citizens would have to hear the case all over again.
The panel of eight women and four men determined, 10-2, Watson Grinding and Manufacturing was 70 percent responsible for the incident that severely damaged a neighborhood and left three dead, while 3M, the company hired to inspect Watson’s gas detection system, was 30 percent responsible.
Jurors awarded nearly all the damages the plaintiffs’ lawyers had requested, about $62.3 million. But they determined that a smaller subset of four plaintiffs, who lived about seven miles away from the Watson facility, were entitled to zero damages.
Counsel for 3M declined to comment after the verdict was reached Monday afternoon.
Adam Lewis of Arnold & Itkin, who represents some of the plaintiffs, told The Lawbook he believed the verdict was “a fair and just result.”
“The jury has heard the evidence … and heard from 3M, and they didn’t believe 3M’s position that they did nothing wrong,” he said.
Two more bellwether trials, each including 50 plaintiffs, are already scheduled to take place in October and January, respectively.
Editor’s Note: This photograph has been cropped to avoid showing one of the victims.
Watson, which had operated on Gessner Road for 60 years, specialized in applying thermal spray coatings to metal parts used in corrosive environments, such as fracking, offshore oil and gas operations, refining, power generation and aerospace. To apply the coatings, propylene gas was used.
The explosion occurred Jan. 24, 2020, after an employee arrived shortly after 4 a.m. and flipped a light switch as he entered the building. A leak had filled the building with about 600 gallons of the gas, which ignited when the light was turned on.
Watson Grinding filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy Feb. 6, 2020, and was later liquidated.
The trial, the fourth from the MDL containing about 2,600 plaintiffs, began July 14 and jurors started their deliberations the afternoon of Aug. 5.
During closing arguments Wednesday, William Moye of Moye Law Firm told the jury 3M technicians who serviced the gas detection system at the Watson Grinding facility should have done more to address the risk of an explosion, including calling the Houston Fire Department and “red tagging” the detectors that were not connected to the PLC, or industrial computer.
He suggested jurors ask themselves whether 3M acted “like a reasonable gas detection company” and said he believed the evidence shows the answer to that question is no.
“Everything they did helped to blow up the neighborhood,” Moye said.
3M has maintained that the fault for the explosion lies squarely with Watson Grinding, noting the company had an explosion and fire in 2008 that prompted the implementation of new safety measures that were never followed. Those safety measures included turning off the flow of gas nightly, both into the respective rooms where spray coating was done and outside where a 2,000-gallon propylene tank sat behind the facility. The company should have installed fireproof light switches after that incident, too, 3M has argued, pointing to Watson’s own safety protocols. Another point 3M has made throughout the trials is that Watson Grinding used the wrong type of hose to bring the gas into one booth, and it was that hose that disconnected and caused the building to fill with propylene.
Ryan Loya of Kwok Daniel, who represents 12 of the plaintiffs, brought a few items into the courtroom for his portion of closing arguments — a pair of running shoes from one client who used to run three miles at Memorial Park every morning but doesn’t anymore because of herniated discs in his spine; a painting from a former professional ballroom dancer who painted as a hobby and now does neither activity because of his injuries; and a small pair of shoes from his youngest client, who was 4 years old at the time of the blast, and started sleeping in her shoes afterward so, he said, she could be ready to flee if it happened again.
The plaintiffs’ lawyers told jurors they should find 3M 75 percent responsible for the explosion and Watson 25 percent responsible.
Following a lunch break Wednesday, Zandra Foley of Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons, gave closing arguments for 3M, pushing back on an argument advanced by the plaintiffs’ lawyers that 3M should have sold Watson Grinding a system that would trigger lights and sirens in the event of a gas leak.
3M didn’t need to sell them more equipment, she said, Watson Grinding needed to plug in what they had. And a 3M technician noted that the system was disconnected from the PLC, she reminded jurors.
“This explosion was caused by Watson Grinding, 100 percent,” she said. “They made choices. They chose not to fix the gas detection system when they knew it didn’t work.”
If 3M had never visited Watson Grinding, Foley said, the explosion still would have happened.
“This culture of carelessness … trickled down from the top to the bottom,” she said, likening what she called the lax approach to safety protocols to texting and driving.
“They’ve gotten away with it so much that it’s not a big deal,” she said. “Until it is.”
After deliberating the entirety of Thursday, the jury had by 2 p.m. Friday sent the court three notes indicating a 9-3 deadlock. After discussing whether the time was right to give an Allen charge, Judge Kristen Brauchle Hawkins decided it was too soon. Instead, she had the jury brought into the courtroom around 3 p.m. She explained that not enough time had been spent on deliberations considering the length of the trial and that she would be sending them home for the weekend to come back fresh Monday.
Early Monday, another question came. The jury told the court they were confused about why Watson Grinding was listed as a possible responsible party on the verdict form if they are not a defendant in the case.
Then, at noon, another note indicating the 9-3 deadlock persisted.
That’s when Harris County District Judge Tanya Garrison — who was filling in for Judge Hawkins — began discussing with the lawyers whether the time had come for an Allen charge. She explained she had a “soft” pattern jury charge she could send back and a “harsh” one from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
After a short back-and-forth with the lawyers, the court sent the “softer” Allen charge back to the jury room.
Loya, of Kwok Daniel, who represents about 1,000 additional plaintiffs in the MDL, told The Lawbook after the verdict that the result was encouraging.
“We feel good enough that we’re going to continue to do this until every single client has gotten the result that they hired us to get,” he said.
Looking at the results of the earlier trials, Loya noted the first jury determined 3M was 20 percent liable and the second jury determined 3M was 49 percent liable. Not including the result of the third trial that ended in a defense win, Loya said the results show juries are going to consistently find 3M is partially responsible for the explosion.
“This jury came back with 30 percent, so we have three juries who, on average, are coming back in between 30 and 35 percent,” he said. “Overall, that’s where 3M’s blame in this case is going to lie: It’s going to be in the 30-percent range, and it’s going to be that every single time.”
So, will this latest result encourage settlement discussions?
“Could,” he said. “It could.”
The plaintiffs are represented by Robert Kwok, J. Ryan Loya, William Hoke, Ranny Sawaf and Marcos Cardenas of Kwok Daniel, William Moye of Moye Law Firm, Ryan Pigg of The Buzbee Law Firm, Adam Lewis of Arnold & Itkin, Eric Dick of Dick Law Firm, Adam Anthony of The Anthony Law Firm and Douglas Alexander, Marcy Hogan Greer, Anna Baker and Hannah Roblyer of Alexander Dubose & Jefferson.
3M is also represented by John Flud, Kevin Risley and Zachary Nye of Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons, Sybil L. Dunlop of Greene Espel and Paul R. Garcia of 3M.
The case number is 2020-05505A. The case number for the MDL is 2021-15294.