08-02-2022 CC RPT 29 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City °J Arts &Innovation City Council Memorandum IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DATE: AUGUST 2, 2022 WARDS: ALL SUBJECT: REQUEST TO APPROVE EXPENDITURE OF $341,100.00 TO RETAIN OUTSIDE COUNSEL WILLIAM PRICE ISSUE: Requesting approval of a $341,100 budget (which is comprised of $210,400 in attorney's fees, $116,000 in expert costs, and $14,700 in anticipated litigation costs) for the City Attorney's Office to retain William Price to serve as lead counsel in the case of Walter Linke et al v. Angel Ramirez et al, Riverside Superior Court Case No. CVR12100730 and to authorize the City Attorney to execute the Outside Counsel Engagement Letter. RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the City Council approve the budget in an amount not to exceed $341,100 to retain the legal services of William Price, who is already on the City's panel of approved outside counsel; and 2. Authorize the City Attorney to execute the Outside Counsel Engagement Letter DISCUSSION: The City Attorney's Office has developed an in-house litigation team to handle third party litigation and other matters. There are times when it may be necessary to engage outside counsel to provide legal services, if for example, there is a conflict of interest or there are inadequate office resources due to unforeseen circumstances. As you may recall, the case of Walter Linke et al v. Angel Ramirez et al ("Linke") involves an auto verses golf cart collision wherein Angel Ramirez drove his car into a golf cart operated by Walter Linke while Mr. Linke was crossing at Canyon Crest Drive. Plaintiff alleges that the golf cart crossing was a dangerous condition of public property. Plaintiff claims significant orthopedic injuries as well as a traumatic brain injury. The City filed a Motion for Summary Judgment that will be heard on August 29, 2022, arguing the City should be entitled to design immunity pursuant to Government Code sect. 830.6. Plaintiff filed a motion for preferential trial to have the trial set as soon as possible. Due to Plaintiff's age and declining health, the Court recently granted Plaintiff's motion and set trial for October 7, 2022. Our in-house assigned trial attorney will be retiring and unavailable to serve as lead counsel in this case. All other experienced in-house litigation attorneys will be engaged