Northrop Case

I am a former officer of Northrop Corp. The Times published an article “Northrop Dealt New Legal Blow Over Payment” (Sept. 20) that erroneously stated that “Gasich’s lawyer did not return a telephone call” made by your reporter to inquire about an arbitrator’s decision in a Northrop case. My counsel did return your reporter’s call; he left a message, but your reporter did not return the call.

I am deeply concerned that the erroneous statement that my counsel failed to respond to your reporter’s call left an impression that I was unwilling, directly or through counsel, to respond to the arbitrator’s erroneous decision. In fact, I object to any suggestion that I accepted as correct the erroneous inferences drawn by the arbitrator that I must have known that a Seoul hotel project involving Northrop was a subterfuge to generate funds to aid Northrop’s efforts to market the F-20 to the South Korean Air Force. I was not involved in the conception or implementation of Northrop’s Seoul Hotel Project, and I flatly deny that I had knowledge of any plan to use Northrop funds designated for the hotel project to promote the F-20.

The arbitrator’s strained inferences are outrageous and unfounded. No evidence whatsoever supports the arbitrator’s mistaken conclusions with respect to me.

WELKO E. GASICH

Encino