Funding tap shut off as lawyers watch the recall from sidelines.

The stakes may be high and his voter approval low, but as Gov. Gray Davis faces an Oct. 7 recall vote he can still rely on the unyielding support of trial lawyers.

Or can he?

With less than two months before the vote, numerous local trial attorneys haven't committed a dime to Davis' fundraising efforts and many may just choose to sit out this political battle.

"Everyone I know of is taking it seriously, but, as far as contributing, I don't know of anybody who has decided on anything," said John Sullivan, president of the Civil Justice Association of California, which plans to track attorney contributions for and against the recall this month.

That reticence could prove to be a real blow to Davis, who took $1.7 million of the $9.9 million trial lawyers gave to candidates in the 2001-2002 election cycle, more than any other candidate. But it Davis loses the recall vote and is replaced by Arnold Schwarzenegger, it could signal a shift in Sacramento concerning tort reform.

Sullivan said trial lawyers have consistently ranked among the top contributors to statewide campaigns, matched only by union groups and teachers associations. They also have been targeted over the years as being symptomatic of a system that relies too much on special interests, a point being underscored during the current recall effort.

The top contributors in 1999 and 2000 to state legislative campaigns were the California Correctional Peace Officers Association, with $2.3 million, and the California Teachers Association, with $1.9 million, according to Common Cause of California. No law firm groups ranked in Common Cause's Top 10.

But the Civil Justice Association estimates that overall contributions from the legal industry to be much higher when including direct contributions from law firms and individual attorneys, not just legal political action committees.

During the non-gubernatorial statewide elections of 1999 and 2000, trial lawyers contributed $6 million. During the 1997-1998 election cycle, trial lawyers contributed $10.3 million.

Not Part of plan

The hesitation among lawyers these days speaks volumes about the complex and ever changing recall situation. It also highlights the bad timing of the election, since most law firms did not budget for a recall-related contribution.

Even the Consumer Attorneys of California, which sent an Aug. 7 letter to members reaffirming its support for Davis, concedes that not all its members back the governor.

"We're solidly against the recall," said Ray Boucher, vice president of the association and a partner at Kiesel Boucher & Larson LLP in Beverly Hills. "But obviously, some of our individual members will help and support whomever they intend to support. They may even support a few Republicans."

Large contributors, like the Consumer Attorneys of California, will be meeting in the next several days to determine their overall goals, Boucher said.

Those may include having to decide how much to give Davis, whether to give in cash or through fundraising efforts and how much, if any, should be allocated to other Democrats as a hedge if the recall vote passes, said Hal Dash, president of public affairs firm Cerrell Associates.

"All these trade organizations who have a lot of clout don't rush into these things," he said. "They lay out a game plan."

But for many, including the Consumer Attorneys of Association, the recall game is much different, he said. Lawyers are watching the polls "like hawks," he said.

Two-thirds of the respondents in an Aug. 11 Gallup poll said they would vote to recall Davis, while 42 percent said they would vote for Republican candidate Schwarzenegger.

In the meantime, law firms are playing a game of wait-and-see.

Christensen Miller Fink Jacobs Glaser Weft & Shapiro LIP, which contributed more than $5,000 to former L.A. Mayor Richard Riordan's gubernatorial campaign last year, only makes donations if there is consensus or interest among its members to support a particular candidate, said Patty Glaser, a partner at the firm. So far, she said, no consensus has been reached.

Nossaman Guthner Knox & Elliott LLP, which contributed to both the Davis and Riordan campaigns last year, makes donations on a "case by ease" basis, said Charles Calderon, a partner involved in contributions and a former state senator.

Calderon, a Democrat, said the firm has not made any plans to contribute one way or the other.

Unanticipated cost

Manatt Phelps & Phillips LLP, a Los Angeles firm that has traditionally contributed along Democratic Party lines, gave upwards of $20,000 to the Davis reelection campaign last year.

Ronald Turovsky, a Manatt partner who handles political contribution requests, said the firm plans to assemble key partners "very shortly" to come up with a consensus on how much to give, and to whom. But he stopped short of saying the firm would commit to Davis.

The biggest snag to this election is that partners have not budgeted for the unanticipated cost. Most In-ms, like Manatt, make campaign allocations at the beginning of the year, when they create their annual budgets.

"Certainly the recall is not something anyone anticipated or budgeted for," he said. "As a result, we'll have to meet and decide what we're going to do."

The poor economy isn't helping, either. "You are tapping members for appropriations during a time when law firms and businesses are hurting a little, if not a lot," Dash said. "That adds to the difficulty."

Another trial lawyer, Browne Greene, said that August vacations are also making it difficult for firm partners to discuss contribution plans.

He said Greene Broillett Panish & Wheeler LLP, based in Santa Monica, is leaning toward supporting Davis, but anticipated that it would "follow the same lead as other consumer attorneys."

By Labor Day, Dash said, most of Davis' big supporters will have made their decisions.

"At the end of the day, the big supporters will continue to be there for Gray Davis, and that includes a good hunk of the legal community," he said. "There's an underlying factor that talks about a known commodity versus an unknown."