|
How to Get
Even with Goliath
Written by Stephanie
B. Goldberg
Reported in
BusinessWeek.com
September 10,2003 - How to Get Even with Goliath Most people cave
when a big corporation pushes them around. Louis Saia pushed back--and
took away $25 million.
The day couldn't
have gone better if he had scripted it himself, mused Louis P. Saia
III. It was May 17, 1995, and the CEO of 12-employee Pallet Reefer
Co. in Houma, La., had completed a long but productive meeting in
Menlo Park, Calif., with his joint-venture partners and their biggest
client. Afterward, they had all chatted amiably over dinner at an
Italian restaurant.
Saia was confident
that his patented invention called the "pallet reefer"
would make him and his wife, Cindy, multimillionaires. The "reefer"
is a stackable shipping container, cooled with a compressor like
a refrigerator. Saia believed it would revolutionize the trucking
industry because it can be used to ship small loads of perishables
alongside other cargo. In the daylong meeting with the client, Con-Way
Transportation Services, it seemed they had cleared up to Con-Way's
satisfaction how certain design flaws could be corrected. Now, surely,
thought Saia, his joint-venture partners--the big truck manufacturer
Grumman Allied Industries--would finally jump-start the project,
which had stalled in 1994 when the parent company, Grumman Corp.,
merged with Northrop Industries. Little did he know he was standing
on the edge of an abyss.
There in the
Con-Way parking lot at twilight, Saia stopped his Grumman Allied
partners as they were leaving. James McConnell, CEO of Grumman Allied
and its representative in Allied Transportation Products--the entity
created by Grumman for the joint venture in 1992--rolled down his
window. "I said, 'Hey, fellas, what do you think? Have you
reached a decision?"' recalls Saia. Yes, said McConnell. They
wanted to proceed with the Pallet Reefer--just not with Saia. Stunned,
Saia begged them to reconsider. "That was the moment I realized
they were trying to muscle me out of my company," says Saia,
now 45. He had reason to think so: McConnell would admit later in
legal proceedings he didn't like Saia, was irritated by the man's
emotional personality, and had decided earlier Saia had to go.
That September,
Saia made a wrenching decision--to sue his corporate partner for
breach of contract. The ensuing legal battle would drive him and
his wife to near-bankruptcy, imperil their marriage, and engulf
him in anxiety. Yet, the couple later realized, it would have been
far worse to give up without a fight. "If Grumman won,"
says Cindy Saia, 39, a chemical engineer and vice-president of the
company, "it would mean our hard work was for nothing and there
was no justice. In my heart, I knew that wasn't so." Saia's
own father, a wealthy Louisiana trucker, scoffed at the notion that
his son could beat Goliath. "He told me I had a better chance
of winning the lottery," says Saia.
How often does
a big company breach a contract--as in Saia's case--or not pay a
vendor, or push a small rival out of the market, or try to acquire
an inventor's technology on the cheap? Surely often enough to generate
horror stories in every industry. But usually entrepreneurs surrender
quietly and move on. The reason is simple: "The chance of a
small business being able to outlast a large business in litigation
is practically nil," says Bob Meade, senior vice-president
of the American Arbitration Assn. To pursue a lawsuit, "you
almost have to be a little loony," says Richard M. Leisner,
a Tampa lawyer and former chair of the American Business Assn.'s
small-business subcommittee. "You have to be a driven-CEO type
who's going to make the lawsuit your baby."
The cost alone
is daunting. Litigators capable of taking on a big corporation charge
around $400 an hour, and a patent case that goes to trial can cost
more than $500,000, says Inventors' Digest. So most entrepreneurs
need a lawyer willing to work for a contingency fee. But that means
you'll lose 25% to 40% of any recovery, plus expenses. Even then,
lawyers frequently demand clients share the ongoing costs of a suit.
That's assuming you can find one. "I reject about 90% of the
cases offered to me," says Raymond P. Niro Sr., a Chicago lawyer
renowned in intellectual property circles as a giant-slayer. And
many top litigators will take a case on contingency only if they
expect to earn millions.
What's more,
the emotional stress and time consumed by litigation can be overwhelming.
"We had no idea what it was going to take," says San Francisco
architect Glenn A. Storek, whose battle against a Citigroup real
estate subsidiary has dragged on for eight years. Last year, he
and his brother Richard, also an architect, won $41.8 million after
convincing a jury that they had been pushed into bankruptcy by Citicorp
Real Estate Inc., which served as bond agent on an Oakland (Calif.)
project. But the case isn't over. Citicorp attorney R. Paul Wickes
says he's confident his client will prevail on appeal. "An
enormous amount of time has gone into keeping the lawsuit going,"
laments Richard Storek. "In the process, we lost our homes
and our personal possessions."
Builders, telecom
resellers, convenience stores--no small business is immune to a
face-off with a giant. The companies most at risk are ones that
share information with prospective backers or clients, lawyers say.
"The big company makes promises to compensate them. Then when
they get their hands on the idea, they cut the little guys loose,"
says Niro, one of the few lawyers who specializes in David vs. Goliath
suits.
Occasionally,
though, Goliaths underestimate the mettle--and the fury--of a scorned
entrepreneur. Take Joseph Freda, president of C&F Packing Co.
in Elk Grove Village, Ill., a 120-employee meatpacker with $40 million
in revenues, a Niro client. "I was determined I wasn't going
to let anybody destroy what my father had worked his tail off for,"
says Freda. So in 1993 he sued Pizza Hut Inc., once a major customer,
alleging it had stolen his family's sausage recipe and technology
and passed it along to the $16.9 billion meat processing giant IBP
Inc. He sued IBP, too, and after a seven-year battle, an appeals
court last year upheld a $10.9 million judgment against the packer.
And Pizza Hut?
In a series of twists and turns typical of high-stakes litigation,
Pizza Hut was dismissed from the original suit, then reinstated
on appeal. Robert W. Millen, general counsel of Pizza Hut in Dallas,
denies all of C&F's charges. The trial is now scheduled for
January, 2002--more than eight years after the suit was first filed.
"The name of the game is delay, delay, delay," says an
exasperated Freda.
There were nights
when Louis Saia paced his kitchen floor, popping Valiums that no
longer had any effect on him, and wondering if he had made a terrible
mistake. Certainly nothing had gone smoothly in the months after
the parking lot encounter. He says he had rejected Grumman Allied's
offer for a $2 million buyout as an "insult." His personality
conflict with McConnell had grown sharper. And in August, Grumman
Allied, which had provided much of the capital and manufacturing
expertise for the joint venture, largely shut down Pallet Reefer's
operations, prompting Saia to file his suit. Later in the legal
proceeding, Grumman alleged--and Saia denied--that Saia lost $12
million for the joint venture through mismanagement and by funneling
business to a small trucking company he owned.
Then things
got worse. In January, 1996, Allied Transportation petitioned a
Delaware court to liquidate the company, citing a boardroom deadlock
between the Saias and the Grumman Allied representatives. Had Grumman
succeeded, speculates Saia, it "would have forced a sale of
my patent, which they could have inexpensively acquired." Next,
Allied Transportation laid off all of Pallet Reefer's employees,
including Saia, leading Con-Way to cancel its contract the next
day, according to an arbitrator's findings. McConnell, who now heads
up a management spin-off of Grumman Allied, declined comment, noting
that his company is no longer part of Northrop Grumman. Northrup
Grumman officials also declined comment.
As spring approached,
Saia's despair deepened. His lawyers had bailed out in January when
he could no longer pay them. He had run through $2 million in assets,
and at one point the family checking account held just $60. "I
was waking up at night hopeless, broke," says Saia. "My
marriage was on the rocks."
There's no question
when Saia hit bottom. The day is etched in his memory. On Mar. 16,
1996, he says he had "violent thoughts" about "stalking"
Northrop Grumman's executives. "I gave thought to a trip to
Los Angeles to pursue my vendetta," he says. But on Mar. 17,
as he was out jogging to relieve his despair, Saia says he experienced
a vision of the Virgin Mary on the steps of his office. He says
she told him "to just have faith in my son," and
from that moment on, he felt a sense of peace.
Call it faith
or coincidence, but the Saias saw their fortunes improve. That month,
New Orleans lawyer Jack M. Alltmont agreed to take the case on contingency.
"I frankly thought, 'Well, we'll get into it and we'll settle,"'
says Alltmont, who instead spent the next year on the case. Saia
also hired a lawyer in Delaware--using borrowed funds--to block
the liquidation of the company. Ultimately, the Delaware judge ruled
that liquidation wouldn't resolve the breach of contract issue.
At that point, both sides agreed to arbitration, which began in
New York on June 2. "If we lost, we would have gone bankrupt,"
says Saia. "But we knew we weren't going to lose."
For a year,
as they commuted to New York for monthly hearings, the Saias lived
on credit cards and prayer. Finally, on Dec. 2, 1997, the arbitrator
awarded Saia $18 million, finding Allied Transportation had breached
its contract and rejecting Grumman Allied's allegations against
Saia. He had just $2 million left after the lawyers took $4.5 million,
and he paid off his creditors. Six months later, he sued Allied
Transportation again, charging his ex-partner failed to return his
patents on time as ordered by the arbitrator. The result: Allied
Transportation settled for $7 million.
Flush with cash,
Saia moved quickly to revive his beloved Pallet Reefer. He poured
$3 million into the business, including the purchase of an abandoned
factory from the local parish for $700,000. His goal: to begin producing
15 pallet reefers a day starting this fall. This time, no outsiders
will get any equity.
That's the business.
The Saias also gave $700,000 of their winnings to charity. "I
feel God has something planned for us, and we don't yet know the
end of the story," says Cindy Saia. For now, though, the curtain
has come down on their legal drama. And for that, they say: Amen.
Back

|