|
When the police frame people by lying in court, they call it testilying.
Is that the same word we use when the cops try to screw the government out of money?
ASU police employees may have to pay school's legal fees after losing federal lawsuit Anne Ryman, The Republic | azcentral.com Published 1:57 p.m. MT July 26, 2017 | Updated 4:00 p.m. MT July 26, 2017 Current and former Arizona State University police employees who sued the school in federal court could be on the hook for some of the university's legal fees after a judge dismissed their case this week. Senior U.S. District Judge Roslyn O. Silver wrote that the employees' complaint, which was amended several times in the past year, didn't come any closer to stating "plausible claims" against the university. In a statement, ASU officials said, "From the beginning, ASU has found nothing credible in the concerns of these individuals. We appreciate the work of the court in getting to the bottom of these baseless claims." Silver ruled that three of the five plaintiffs could be liable for legal fees. She also is sanctioning the employees' former attorney, David Dow, for what she called "frivolous filings," actions that she wrote "constituted bad faith attempts to unreasonably and vexatiously prolong this litigation." Dow also could be liable for attorneys' fees. Dow was not available for comment. One of the former ASU employees who is a plaintiff in the lawsuit and facing possible legal fees, Matthew Parker, said they are still analyzing the judge's ruling and reviewing whether to appeal the decision to the Arizona Court of Appeals. "We feel very strongly that there were and continue to be issues within the ASU police department," he said. The five plaintiffs claimed they were harmed in a variety of ways during their employment with the country's largest public university, including age and disability discrimination and violation of free-speech rights. Only one still works for ASU. The lawsuit said three employees were subjected to an internal-affairs investigation over a blog called the ASU Police Integrity Report that detailed complaints about the department. The employees said they suffered "emotional distress and worry about their jobs" because of the questioning. The employees filed a civil suit in 2016, and Judge Silver dismissed it in July 2016, saying the claims were vague and overly broad. But she gave the employees the opportunity to amend their claims against ASU, which they did. This week's order said the case is dismissed and claims cannot be amended again. Silver's order tells the parties they must meet with each other and see if they can agree on the amount of attorneys' fees. If no agreement is reached, ASU will be required to file a motion on how much they are seeking. Reach the reporter at 602-444-8072 or anne.ryman@arizonarepublic.com.
These ASU Police Employees May Be on the Hook for the University's Legal Fees FRIDAY, JULY 28, 2017 AT 10:15 A.M. BY MOLLY LONGMAN Current and former Arizona State University Police employees could have to pay for the university's legal fees after a judge dismissed their federal lawsuit. After several amendments to a complaint originally filed in state court back in early 2016, Senior U.S. District Judge Roslyn O. Silver found the claims to be "unclear" and not "plausible," according to a court order. While former drafts of the complaint alleged the university had pressured some of the plaintiffs to falsify crime statistics and traffic stops while retaliating against employees who objected to doing so, the most recent draft of the complaint only alleged violations of free speech and disability and age discrimination. But Judge Silver found many of the allegations in the complaint, even after multiple amendments, "legally or factually baseless from an objective perspective.” In one case, a former employee alleged disability discrimination, but the statute of limitations had expired. In another case, the plaintiff said he'd been constructively discharged on July 2, 2015, but that contradicted an email he'd sent on February 13, 2015, stating he intended to retire that July. In a statement, the ASU said they thought the allegations were BS all along. "From the beginning, ASU has found nothing credible in the concerns of these individuals. We appreciate the work of the court in getting to the bottom of these baseless claims," the statement read. Silver originally dismissed the case in July 2016 because the claims were too vague. But she gave the ASU employees another chance to amend their claims, resulting in the latest draft of the complaint. Silver said the claims weren't based on factual evidence, citing former court case Ashcroft v. Iqbal, and noting the claim didn't even have to be detailed but did require “more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” As such, Silver ruled that three of the five plaintiffs and their former lawyer, David Dow, could be paying the piper — in this case, ASU's legal fees. The plaintiffs can't amend this claim, though one plaintiff facing possible legal fees, Matthew Parker, told The Arizona Republic they are still considering whether they'll appeal the judge's decision. The judge sanctioned Dow for "knowingly or recklessly" raising what the court order called "a frivolous argument." Dow did not respond to a request for comment from the Phoenix New Times.
|