Who is Bob Martel? "Executive Director" of "Humboldt Watershed Council"

He's listed as the "Executive Director" of "Humboldt Watershed Council."

In April of 2000 the North Coast Journal reported that "Local activist Bob Martel received an expensive setback this week in his ongoing battle against Pacific Lumber and its parent company, MAXXAM. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Martel's appeal to an earlier decision in MAXXAM's favor and ordered him to pay the company legal fees of more than $110,000.

The case concerns the failure in 1988 of a savings and loan association in which MAXXAM and its chairman, Charles Hurwitz, were investors. Martel contends that Hurwitz exercised control over the company; Hurwitz denies the charges. Related cases are still pending, but the court ruled that Martel's case was "frivolous."

Martel disputes that claim, saying that the suit cost him $250,000 and took five years of research. That, he said, "doesn't actually fit the definition of frivolous."

As to how he might pay the legal fees awarded by the court, Martel said he hasn't earned "more than six thousand dollars in a year in recent memory"

MAXXAM spokesman Josh Reiss said that the corporation intends to pursue the claim.
###

On April 29, they reported that "A taxpayer and a local nonprofit group have been ordered to pay legal fees for two separate lawsuits involving Pacific Lumber and its chief stockholder, Charles Hurwitz.

In 1995, Humboldt County resident Robert Martel filed suit against Hurwitz, alleging he had defrauded the federal government of $1.6 billion in the collapse of the United Savings Association of Texas 11 years ago, according to a report in the Times-Standard. Now Martel has been ordered by U.S. District Court Judge Lynn Hughes to pay Hurwitz' $110,123 in legal fees and expenses.

Hughes ruled that Martel's suit was "abusive litigation" because Martel had based much of his suit on information garnered from newspaper reports. Hughes also said Martel, who had filed the suit as a taxpayer, lacked standing to sue on behalf of the federal government.

Neither Martel nor Hurwitz could be reached for comment.

In a separate case, the Garberville-based Environmental Protection Information Center was ordered to pay Pacific Lumber $17,731 in legal costs as a result of a June 1997 lawsuit. EPIC sued PL in March of 1995, maintaining that the California Department of Forestry should have prepared an environmental impact study before it granted the company a salvage-logging permit for spotted owl habitat now protected as part of the Headwaters Reserve.

EPIC spokesperson Kevin Bundy said U.S. District court judge Louis Bechtle dismissed the suit because EPIC "couldn't convince the court (salvage logging) would violate the endangered species act."

John A. Campbell, PL president, recently issued a statement saying PL is entitled to the court costs.

"The favorable court ruling highlighted that salvage and other logging would not cause a take of endangered species," he said. "The court ... made clear in this case that endangered species would benefit from the working relationship developed by Pacific Lumber, federal wildlife agencies and the California Department of Forestry."

Bundy said the amount EPIC must pay is a fraction of the $700,000 PL originally requested to cover fees.
###

In other coverage, it is reported that: "Judge Hughes characterized Martel's pleading as "Regurgitating politicized half-truths" ...Describing Martel as "a bystander" who "knows nothing, saw nothing, did nothing," U.S. District Court Judge Lynn N. Hughes determined that Martel "lacks standing, was not the original source of the information, and filed his suit too late." Martel filed suit in January 1995, saying he was bringing the action on behalf of the U.S. government; however, the U.S. government declined to participate in the suit. (Missed another statute of limitations did ya, guys?)

Is this why getting Paul Gallegos to file the lawsuit for them was so important? Martel and Miller lacked standing.

And who paid the $250,000 Martel claims to have paid out?