PROVIDENCE -- Testing of evidence collected from the charred ruins of The Station nightclub is being delayed pending resolution of a dispute among lawyers.
The dispute centers on whether possible defendants in civil lawsuits will have to identify themselves before they are sued by fire victims.
Superior Court Judge Alice B. Gibney had been expected to approve evidence-testing protocols yesterday.
But when Mark Mandell, a lawyer for victims' families and survivors of the West Warwick fire, argued that everyone who wants to participate in the testing process identify themselves, lawyer James Ruggieri, who represents as-yet-unnamed defendants, objected and asked for time to rebut Mandell's legal arguments.
Gibney then postponed her decision on approving guidelines for testing until July 11.
Mandell, a court-appointed interim lead lawyer for Station fire victims and their families, argued that anyone who wants to test any of the 717 items collected by private investigators from the site of the former nightclub should have to identify themselves now.
"Take the veil of secrecy off," he said in an interview after the hearing.
Mandell told Gibney it would not be fair or objective to allow unnamed product manufacturers to participate in the testing of products of their own making without first being identified. Manufacturers, he said, have special knowledge about their products and could skew testing to ensure that their products appear safe, he said.
But Ruggieri scoffed at this notion, saying in an interview after court:
"That wouldn't happen. We wouldn't even consider doing something like that." He said his clients' anonymity would in no way compromise the testing of any product. He said that any party who has not yet been sued should be allowed to remain anonymous until named as a defendant and officially required to answer a court complaint.
But Mandell told Gibney: "There's an overwhelming dominant interest" in having the potential defendants identify themselves in order to participate in the testing of evidence. Courts have ruled that only in "exceptional" circumstances may a party to litigation remain anonymous, he argued.
At this point, he said, "we see no justification" for unnamed defendants to remain anonymous. The fact that they might suffer financial harm is not good enough reason to allow them to continue to remain unidentified, he said.
Gibney is considering a set of guidelines that would govern testing of the evidence taken from the nightclub site, including requiring advance notice if testing of evidence will be done somewhere other than the Cranston warehouse that is serving as a repository for the materials, and how the cost of the testing will be apportioned among various parties.
The lawyers indicated in court yesterday that they agreed on most of the proposed testing protocols.
But toward the end of the hearing, the dispute arose over whether parties who want to participate in the testing would have to fully disclose their identities.
Not all defendants and potential defendants agree with Ruggieri's position that anonymity should remain until lawsuits are filed.
Marc DeSisto, a lawyer representing the Town of West Warwick's insurer, agreed with the position taken by Mandell regarding full disclosure.
The town and its fire inspector, Denis Larocque, have already been sued by fire victims.
But most lawyers, including those represented by Mandell and others who are part of a Rhode Island Trial Lawyers' Association steering committee, have held off filing suit in connection with the Feb. 20 fire. They say they want to first determine, through testing of evidence and other investigative avenues, who should be sued and who should not.
The fire at The Station killed 100 people and injured more than 200 others. It began when the rock band Great White set off pyrotechnics, which ignited highly flammable packing foam that had been installed as soundproofing near the stage.
