v . 0 0 5 P a g e | 1
December 17, 2024
ITEM TITLE
Attorney Services: Authorize Payment of Invoices to Outside Counsel in the Nunis Litigation Report Number: 24-0304
Location: No specific geographic location
Department: City Attorney
G.C. § 84308: No
Environmental Notice: This activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required.
Recommended Action
Adopt a resolution that provides authority up to $130,000 to the City Attorney for payment of final invoices from Manning Kass and Lewis Brisbois relating to outside attorney s and vendor services rendered in the Nunis litigation.
SUMMARY
In connection with the lawsuit filed by the Nunis family, City retained outs ide attorneys to defend City and its Police Officers. During the course of the litigation, the City Attorney has sought spending authority for outside counsel and associated litigation costs and now seeks additional authority of $130,000 for payment of the final invoices in the case.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Director of Development Services has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines because it will not result in a physical change in the environment; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA.
Thus, no environmental review is required.
BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
P a g e | 2
DISCUSSION
In connection wit h the lawsuit filed by the Nunis family, City retained outside attorneys with the law firm Manning & Kass, Ellrod, Ramirez, Trester LLP (“Manning Kass”) to defend City and its Police Officers. The attorneys retained from Manning Kass subsequently went to work for Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP (“Lewis Brisbois”) but continued to defend City and its Police Officers in the Nunis litigation. In the course of, and in connection with, the defense of City and its Police Officers, outside counsel also retaine d certain experts and vendors to provide services for the defense of the litigation and during trial. Now that the trial has resolved, the outside attorneys and vendors have submitted their final invoices for payment by City.
During the course of the litigation, the City Attorney has sought spending authority for outside counsel and associated litigation costs in the Nunis matter of up to $1.9 million. The final invoices received bring the total cost of the case to $2,024,083.22. Accordingly, the City Attorney now seeks additional authority of $130,000 for payment of the final invoices received in the Nunis matter, bringing the total authority for litigation costs in the case to $2,030,000. City is insured for the costs incurred in the Nunis case and will seek reimbursement from its insurer for the amounts paid which exceed City’s $500,000 self-insured retention.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is not site-specific and consequently, the 500-foot rule found in California Code of Regulations Title 2, section 18702.2(a)(11), is not applicable to this decision for purposes of determining a disqualifying real property-related financial conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.).
Staff is not independently aware and has not been informed by any City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter.
CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT
There is no additional fiscal impact as a result of this action. Funding is included in the current year’s budget appropriations.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
There is no ongoing fiscal impact as a result of this action.
ATTACHMENTS
None.
Staff Contact: Karen Rogan, Assistant City Attorney