Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-12-09 Minutes• 687 MINUTES OP A CITY COUNCIL MEETING A special meeting of .the Fayetteville'L City Council was held Wednesday, December 9;-1992, at 9:20 a:m. in Room 326 of the City Administration Building,.<113 West Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. PRESENT: Mayor Fred .Hanna; AldermeniFred Vorsanger, Len Edens, Stephen Miller, Kit Williams, Conrad Odom, and Woody Bassett; City Attorney Jerry Rose; City Clerk Sherry Thomas; Administrative Services Director Ben Mayes; Public Works Director Kevin Crosson; Planning Management Director Alett Little; members of press, staff, and audience. ABSENT: Aldermen Joan Chapman and Heather Faddoul. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hanna called the meeting to order with six Aldermen present. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE Mayor Hanna stated Alderman Chapman had asked if he would create a committee to address environmental concerns of issues and report to the Council. She stated she would like to be on the committee and felt Alderman Miller would like to as well. Mayor Hanna stated he would like to have three or four aldermen on the committee. Aldermen Vorsanger and Edens stated they did not want to be on the committee. ADVERTISING & PROMOTION COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS Mayor Hanna stated the Chamber of Commerce was requesting appointments be made to the Advertising and Promotion Commission. The mayor is automatically appointed to the commission. He nominated Fred Vorsanger and Woody Bassett to the commission. There were no other nominations. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. SETTLEMENT OFFER/TAYLOR CASE City Attorney Rose stated that as the city's attorney, he is morally obligated to bring any and all settlement offers before the Council. A settlement offer has been made in the Earl Dean Looney v. Dennis Taylor, Police Officer case. Ron Woodruff, attorney for Looney, and Dan Bufford, attorney for Scottsdale Insurance, the city's errors and omissions insurance carrier, are both present. • City Attorney Rose stated Mr. Looney was arrested in August of 1991 at a place called Chili Billy's. The case stems from the complaint that the booking officer, Dennis Taylor, used excessive and unreasonable force and held Mr. Looney.in a "headlock". r December 9, 1992 Police Chief Watson investigated and eventually fired Mr. Taylor. Taylor appealed to the Civil Service Commission. The Civil Service Commission rules that Mr. Taylor had used excessive force; however, they felt firing was too strong an action for the offense. They reinstated Mr. Taylor after their recommended suspension time period. Subsequently, Mr. Looney filed a civil suit claiming his federal civil rights had been violated. Rose stated there are two parts to a lawsuit: (1) liability and (2) damages. The City is not liable for any of the use of excessive force by Mr. Taylor because there is not policy or matter of course by the police department in any way condoning excessive force. Damages is the part of the suit that we are concerned with in this case. Damages are a weakness in the Looney case. He is claiming neck and back injuries as a result of the claimed use of force. He has some $8,000 plus medical bills. Mr. Looney's physicians have been deposed, and some of them feel Mr. Looney may be exaggerating and even malingering his injuries in order to get more of a settlement. in addition, Mr. Looney's credibility could be questionable since he has had previous back injuries and because he has a prior criminal history as well as having been arrested during this incident for drug and drug related offenses. He may have some jury appeal in the fact that the police officer used force against him and caused injuries. The 1983 Civil Rights Law stated that if the plaintiff wins, even if he is awarded only $1 in damages, his attorney fees will be paid by the defendant. As previously stated, the City would not be liable because there is no policy or custom of using excessive force. However, Mr. Taylor, as an employee of the City, is covered under the City's errors and omissions policy with Scottsdale Insurance. There is a $50,000 deductible on this policy. In addition to the deductible amount, the City has to pay its own attorney fees. Mr. Looney has offered to settle for $30,000. Alderman Edens asked if the Council accepts the offer, who pays the attorney fees. City Attorney Rose stated the $30,000 to Looney would end the case with him. Looney would use the $30,000 to settle all his debts, i.e., medical bills, attorney fees, etc. The City would still have to pay an additional amount to Mr. Bufford for his defense of the case on the city and Mr. Taylor's behalf. Alderman Bassett stated he would have to abstain from this vote because his firm sometimes represents Scottsdale Insurance. But, he did offer that any time a case goes to trial, it is merely a crap shoot because no one can ever predict what a jury might do. 1 1 • • • December 9, 1992.:: He advised the Council to consider this risk. He felt under the circumstances, the $30,000 figure was reasonable. Ron Woodruff, attorney for Mr. Looney, addressed the Council and stated this case was not to be intended in any way to be an indictment against the police department or Chief Watson. His client was not a previous felon, and is not as disreputable as perhaps City Attorney Rose indicated he might be. The rule of thumb in his firm is to try and get three times the medical bills plus attorney fees, which in this case would make the $30,000 settlement offer in the ballpark. He feels his client definitely has a good case and will win in court. Dan Bufford, representing Scottsdale Insurance, addressed the Council stating that there is obviously a problem with the case in as much as it was a third party that filed the initial excessive force charges and not Mr. Looney. Sgt. Stanley, of the Fayetteville Police .Department, was present during the booking procedure and is the person who saw and felt the actions by Mr. Taylor were excessive. Lt. Helder, of the Fayetteville Police Department, was assigned the duty of investigating the complaint. The FBI also got involved, and it was determined that unwarranted and excessive force was used. At this time, Mr. Looney filed his suit. One of the things that has not been mentioned is the possibility of punitive damages. They have not been discussed, but the award of them by the jury is a possibility. He has been trying to determine exactly what expenses this case will involve for the City and has been trying to mitigate them on the City's behalf. Mr. Bufford stated Mr. Taylor denies the use of excessive force. However, the other officers stated he did use the force and this does not make an easy defense. The emergency room report stated Mr. Looney did have hoarseness and swelling in the neck and throat area. Mr. Looney has also seen several doctors in the area, and they have been deposed for this case. Mr. Bufford stated the timing was a negative factor in this case as well. Juries have not been looking favorable toward police departments when dealing with alleged use of excessive force. He and Mr. Woodruff have been working some time in arriving at this mutually acceptable $30,000 figure, and he feels this would probably be the best method of mitigating expenses for the City. Alderman Williams asked approximately what were Mr. Bufford's fees to date. Mr. Bufford estimated somewhere between $7,000 and $8,000 to date. The final preparation for trial and a 2-3. day trial would increase the total to -somewhere in the area of $12,000 to $15,000. December 9, 1992 Alderman Williams stated that the total being asked for them to consider was then the $30,000 settlement with Mr. Looney plus the attorney fees for Mr. Bufford. Mr. Bufford stated this was correct. Mr. Woodruff stated several cases in the surrounding areas lately. amount was $20,000; in Springdale, about two months ago. So, the reason. of the nature have been settled In Huntsville, the settlement the settlement amount of $35,000 $30,000 figure is well within Alderman Vorsanger stated he would like to have City Attorney Rose's recommendation to the Council. City Attorney Rose stated he recommended the Council accept the settlement offer. Alderman Williams stated he too would be abstaining, as Mr. Taylor was an ex -brother in law. There was discussion about the voting procedures. With six aldermen present and two abstaining, there would only be four aldermen to vote. Therefore, it was decided the Mayor would be the fifth vote in this issue. Alderman Miller stated he felt this was a pretty clear cut case with a civil rights violation, and he felt the settlement offer was acceptable. Alderman Bassett stated there was not necessarily a civil rights violation. This has yet to be determined by a jury. Alderman Edens stated he would rely on the City Attorney's advice. Vorsanger, seconded by Odom, made a motion to accept the settlement offer. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 5-0-2, with Aldermen Williams and Bassett abstaining. RESOLUTION 181-92 AB RECORDED IN TEE CITY CLERE'8 OFFICE City Attorney Rose stated that in the little over three years he has been with the City, this is only the third civil rights case there has been. They are rare occurrences and he commended the police department and Chief Watson for the fine job and training they provide to their staff which enables them to avoid lawsuits. Alderman Williams stated by settling this suit, the City is not admitting liability. December;9, 1992,.= Alderman Miller asked"if the officer had received any counseling after he had been reinstated to the department. r f Chief Watson statedhe had received 1additional training and supervision. iQ Ben Mayes stated the Council needed to approve a budget adjustment for the payment ofa:this offer. The -Money would come from the General Fund. Vorsanger, seconded by Odom, made a motion to approve the budget adjustment. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 6 to 0. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:00 a.m.