Loading...
Resolution No. 90382111 RESOLUTION NO. 9038 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VERNON APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A 4 JOINT REPRESENTATION AND WAIVER OF CONFLICT LETTER 5 BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF VERNON AND LOEB &,LOEB 6 WHEREAS, a.complaint against Leonis C. Malburg, Thomas A. 7 Ybarra, and William McCormick, individually, has been filed in LASC 8 Case No. BS 101423; and 9 WHEREAS, a complaint against Leonis C. Malburg, individually, j1 10 has been filed in LASC Case No. BC 346800; and 11 WHEREAS, a complaint against Hilario Gonzales, William Davis, 12 and William McCormick, individually, has been filed in Case No. 13 06K04481; and 14 WHEREAS, LASC Case Nos. BS 101423 and BC 346800 and Case No. 15 06KO4481 are collectively referred to herein as the "Lawsuits;" and 16 WHEREAS, on May 3, 2006, the City Council of the City of 17 Vernon adopted Resolution Nos. 9033 through 9037 indemnifying, holding 18 harmless and authorizing the defense of Leonis C. Malburg, Thomas A. 19 Ybarra, Hilario Gonzales, William McCormick and William Davis in the 20 Lawsuits; and 21 WHEREAS, the law firm of Loeb & Loeb ("Loeb") has been 22 providing legal services to the City in the past; and 23 WHEREAS, the City believes that it is to the benefit and best 24 interests of the City that Loeb be employed for the purpose of 25 representing Leonis C. Malburg, Thomas A. Ybarra, Hilario Gonzales, 26 William McCormick and William Davis in the Lawsuits regarding any act, 27 failure to act, or omission in the performance of their duties and 28 responsibilities as councilmen of the City of Vernon. 1 2 3 4 5 6 VA 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VERNON AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The City Council of the City of Vernon hereby finds and determines that the recitals contained hereinabove are true (land correct. SECTION 2: The City Council of the City of Vernon hereby approves the Joint Representation and Waiver of Conflict Letter with Loeb and employs.Loeb for the purpose of representing Leonis C. IMalburg, Thomas A. Ybarra, Hilario Gonzales, William McCormick and William Davis in all matters in connection with and in all phases of the Lawsuits. SECTION 3: The City Council of the City of Vernon hereby authorizes the City Attorney to execute said Letter Agreement for, and on behalf of, the City of Vernon and the Acting City Clerk is hereby authorized to attest thereto. SECTION 4: The City Council of the City of Vernon hereby directs the Acting City Clerk, or his designee, to send one fully executed Letter Agreement to: Loeb & Loeb Attn. Anthony Murray, Esq. 10100 Santa Monica Blvd., Ste. 2200 Los Angeles, CA 90067-4164 SECTION 5: The Acting City Clerk of the City of Vernon shall certify to the passage of this resolution, and thereupon and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of May, 2006. EONIS C. MA BURG, Mayor �TTES 1 3RUC V. M LKENHORST, JR., kcti y Clerk - 2 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) I, BRUCE V. MALKENHORST, JR., Acting City Clerk of the City of Vernon, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. 9038, was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon at a regular meeting of the City Council duly held on Wednesday, May 3, 2006, and thereafter was duly signed by the Mayor of the City of Vernon. (SEAL) BRUCE Actin KENHORST, JR., Clerk - 3 - CITY COUINCIL LEONIS C. MALBURG Mayor THOMAS A. YBARRA Mayor Pro-Tem WM. 'BILL" DAVIS Councilman H. "LARRY" GONZALES Councilman W. MICHAEL McCORMICK Councilman May 10, 2006 RJR 4305 Santa Fe Avenue, Vernon, California 90058 telephone (323) 583-8811 Loeb & Loeb LLP 10100 Santa Monica Boulevard Suite 2200 Los Angeles, CA 90067-4120 Attn: Anthony Murray Re: Engagement Agreement Letters SOL BENUDIZ Police Chief MARK C. WHITWORTH Acting Fire Chief LEWIS J. POZZEBON Director of Environmental Health S. KEVIN WILSON Director of Community Services SHARON L. DUCKWORTH Acting City Treasurer Enclosed herewith a copies of the following fully executed Engagement Agreement Letters with Messrs: Leonis C.,Malburg Thomas A. Ybarra Hilario Gonzales William Michael McCormick William Davis If you have any questions, please call Bruce V. Malkenhorst, Jr. at 323/583-8811 ext. 266. .I Sincerely, N"11 Deputy City Clerk :ng Xclugivehl 30ptrial ev ANTHONY MURRAY for Loeb & Loeb LLP 10100 Santa Monica Boulevard Suite 2200 Los Angeles, CA 90067-4120 Via Facsimile & U.S. Mail Direct 310.282.2373 Main 310.282.2000 Fax 310.919.3716 amurray@loeb.com Privileged and Confidential April 18, 2006 Eric T. F resch City Attorney City of Vernon 4305 Santa Fe Avenue Vernon, CA 90058 Re: Representation of Council Members Dear Eric: As you know, Council Members William Davis, Hilario Gonzales, William McCormick and Thomas Ybarra have asked this firm to represent them in the lawsuits in which they have been sued. I informed them last week that we would be glad to represent them subject to satisfactory arrangement for payment of our fees and costs. I understand there is some question about whether the City of Vernon has the right to pay the fees of the Council Members. Our research confirms that the City has the right, and indeed the obligation, to provide them a defense. In Degrassi v. City of Glendora, 207 F.3d 636, 640-641 (9th Cir. 2000), involving an action against a former city council member, the court made clear that Government Code section 995 "creates the obligation to defend a public employee." Section 995 provides: "Except as otherwise provided in Sections 995.2 and 995.4, upon request of an employee or former employee, a public entity shall provide for the defense of any civil action or proceeding brought against him, in his official or individual capacity or both, on account of an act or omission in the scope of his employment as an employee of the public entity. For the purposes of this part, a cross -action, counterclaim or cross -complaint against an employee or former Los Angeles NewYorl< Chicago Nashville www.loeb.com A limited liability partnership including professional corporations LOEB& LOE B LAP employee shall be deemed to be a civil action or proceeding brought against him." (Emphasis added.)' Eric T. Fresch April 18, 2006 Page 2 Section 995.2 provides that a public entity may refuse to provide a defense if: (1) the act or omission was not within the scope of the employee's employment; (2) the employee acted or failed to act because of fraud, corruption, or actual malice; or (3) the defense would create a specific conflict of interest between the entity and the employee. None of these conditions applies here. First, all allegations against the Council Members are based on acts or omissions in their official capacity. Second, there has been no fraud, corruption, or actual malice. Third, there appears to be no conflict between the interests of the City and the Council Members. The other exception to the City's obligation to provide a defense — section 995.4, covering actions by a public entity against its employees — is not applicable here. California Labor Code Section 2802 provides that, "[a]n employer shall indemnify his or her employee for all necessary expenditures or losses incurred by the employee in direct consequence of the discharge of his or her duties ... including, but not limited to attorney's fees incurred by the employee enforcing the rights granted by this section." The term "employer" is defined to include "[e]ach county, city, district, and all public and quasi public corporations and public agencies therein." (See Cal. Lab. Code § 3300(b).) Thus, it is clear that the City must provide a defense to the Council Members in the pending suits.2 Please let me know as soon as possible whether the City will provide a defense by Loeb & Loeb. Because of the time constraints, I will send engagement letters to the Council Members pending your response. ' A city "officer" is a public employee. (Cal. Gov. Code § 810.2; Cal. Labor Code § 3351(b) ("Employee" defined to include "[a]II elected and appointed paid public officers"). See also, U.S. v. Gaytan, 342 F.3d 1010, 1012 n.3 (9th Cir. 2003) (holding that a person serving as city mayor and city council member was an "employee" under Labor Code § 3351(b).) See Cal. Gov. Code § 995.8 (public entity may provide for the defense of an employee even in a criminal action). 2 Note that all expenses of providing the defense "are proper charges against a public entity," and "[a] public entity has no right to recover such expenses from the employee ...." (Cal. Gov. Code § 996.) Many thanks for your assistance. Sincerely, Anthony M y for Loeb Loeb LLP AM:ee 20768610002 LA1532722.1 cc: Mayor Leonis Malburg William Davis Hilario Gonzales William M. McCormick Thomas Ybarra Jeff Harrison, Esq. Eric T. Fresch April 18, 2006 Page 3