It’s a coda to the savings and loan crisis.

Within the next few weeks a federal claims judge in Washington will award Glendale Federal Bank, which is now owned by California Federal Bank, up to $1.9 billion in damages in its “goodwill” lawsuit against the U.S. government.

The damages awarded will set a precedent for dozens of similar lawsuits that other savings institutions have pending against the federal government. Total damages could reach as high as $50 billion, most of which is to be paid by U.S. taxpayers.

“Judge (Loren) Smith has said he will make a decision by the end of the year,” said Christie Flanagan, executive vice president and general counsel for San Francisco-based California Federal, which bought Glendale Federal Bank earlier this year. “We do expect that he will award full damages and expect that we will receive that amount.”

Flanagan’s optimism is based on statements made by Smith in September 1997, when, according to court transcripts, he said: “Plaintiffs have put on an exceedingly strong case. If the decision were to be made by me today I would grant the plaintiff’s recovery that they are seeking.”

Smith’s office last week declined to comment on the pending decision.

The damage phase of California Federal’s own goodwill litigation against the U.S. government, in which the thrift is seeking $1.5 billion, is set to begin Jan. 11. Because the Cal Fed case is less complex than that of Glendale Federal, Flanagan does not expect this phase to last more than two months. In the Glendale Federal case, it lasted 19 months.

Another now-defunct L.A.-based thrift, Coast Federal Financial Inc., which was bought by H.F. Ahmanson & Co. earlier this year, is seeking $1.1 billion in damages. (Ahmanson itself was subsequently acquired by Washington Mutual Inc.) The damages phase of that case is not expected to begin until 2000.

All these cases have their roots in the savings and loan debacle of the late ’80s, when the U.S. government took a liberal stance on accounting standards in order to prop up the then-teetering thrift industry.

To speed consolidation among thrifts, the government allowed buyers of weaker institutions to count “supervisory goodwill,” or the difference between their purchase price and the market value of the troubled institution that they were buying, as assets on their balance sheets.

But growing concern among lawmakers that supervisory goodwill was little more than financial smoke and mirrors led to the practice being phased out by Congress in 1989, which in turn led to a string of S & L; failures and a barrage of lawsuits against the government.

Because Glendale Federal’s suit is the closest to being resolved, it is expected to set a precedent for the other cases.

Investors can get a piece of the action by investing in “litigation warrants” issued by Glendale Federal, California Federal and Coast. Anyone holding the warrants will be eligible for a piece of any eventual awards that emerge from the goodwill cases.

Due to months of legal wrangling and the expectation that any judgement will likely be followed by years of appeals, the market value of the warrants has been slumping.

That could quickly change if Smith awards full damages in the Glendale Federal case, according to Charlotte Chamberlain, an analyst at Jefferies & Co.