Plaintiff Who Alleged Airport Concealment Has Litigation History

LTB default 777x437

Stanley G. Hilton, who recently sued (among many others) San Francisco International Airport and his realtors for allegedly failing to warn him that his house was close to the airport, turns out to be an attorney, and one with a record of interesting litigation.

In a lawsuit filed in August, Hilton claimed he got stuck in an elevator for an hour, which he says caused him "extreme mental and physical pain and suffering, claustrophobia," and "a phobia of riding in elevators in any building due to this incident [which has] severely hampered his ability to function in general."  He claimed upwards of $20 million for that terrible, terrible hour.  He is probably better known, though, for a $7 billion RICO action against former president George W. Bush and his cabinet that blamed defendants for conspiring to allow the 9/11 attacks, a lawsuit that (as you might guess) was eventually dismissed.

According to the State Bar of California, Mr. Hilton attended the University of Chicago, has a law degree from Duke University, and was admitted to the bar in 1975.  His license is currently "inactive," a status that is sometimes chosen voluntarily but which in his case appears to be the result of a deal with the State Bar Court on certain disciplinary charges.

Those included charges of misconduct related to a deposition, which Hilton allegedly repeatedly rescheduled, and when he did show up he "made various rude and/or false comments to and about opposing counsel."  He later left a phone message with counsel saying he was rescheduling again because of illness, a claim that the Bar alleges was false "as evidenced by respondent leaving a further unintended message with opposing counsel wherein respondent laughed and repeatedly shouted 'f— you man' in a voice different from the one in which the intended message was left."

Say Hello to My Request for a Continuance In his response, Hilton admitted "calling the opposing counsel a 'rookie' [at the deposition], but denies that these terms [sic] were false, although he admits that they were probably rude."  As for the "further unintended message," Hilton had a good explanation for that.  "These comments," Hilton wrote, "in fact were not related to the message he had just left for the opposing counsel; in fact, he was with a friend and was attempting to imitate Al Pacino in the movie 'Scarface.'"

As I've said before, always be absolutely sure your call has disconnected before attempting to imitate Al Pacino in the movie "Scarface."  The risk that your comments will be misinterpreted is just too great.