Tuesday, September 23, 2008

$1,245,591.37 and counting

$1,245,591.37 is the bill that the attorneys representing the City of Durham have submitted for their time and expenses in the three lawsuits over the Duke Lacrosse Hoax/Frame. SO FAR!

Kimberly Grantham, assistant city attorney, said the city has sought $229,350 in reimbursements from the American International Group, the company that owns the insurer the city was under contract with in 2006 when the Duke lacrosse case started.

Under the insurance contract, the city was responsible for the first $500,000 and then the insurer would pick up the next $5 million.

Grantham said Tuesday that all five firms -- Faison & Gillespie, Poyner & Spruill; Kennon Carver Belo Craig & McKee; Maxwell Freeman & Bowman and Troutman Sanders -- are providing their services at below-market rate. N & O
While Asst City Attorney Grantham was assuring the citizens of Durham they were on the hook for "only" $500,000, questions were raised immediately about the accuracy of that claim. Is the Office of the City Attorney advising the City Council about the potential financial risks in their strategy or is it passing out advice they want to hear?

See LieStopper's Forum for discussion

Hat Tip: Walt-in-Durham


Anonymous said...

The current $1.245M legal tab is only the initial "drop-in-the-bucket." Seriously, the attorneys and law firms haven't even begun discovery, depos, etc. (the truly labor-intensive and time-consuming (read: expensive) tasks. If Durham and Duke push this further they'll view the current legal fee as mere rounding error compared to what's going to hit them. And I can't wait. This will bleed Durham taxpayers like nothing else.

Anonymous said...

Does the City Council really understand the dangers in this defense? Are they actually listening to the City Attorneys Office when one of the defendants, Patrick Baker, is in charge?

These lawfirms haven't even begun to start billing for the real costs of these trials. The City of Durham might not receive a penny back, nor they might not be covered if the Courts find malice in the actions of City Governement.

The Citizens of Durham need representation from their city governement that has nothing to do with the defendants in this case.

Anonymous said...

Methinks Durham politicos are, once again, mis-speaking the truth.

At one time, Durham politicos stated that Steptoe was handling the lawsuits "pro bono". Who believes this to be true?

The former City Manager (who over sees police) involved in the suits has become the City Attorney. Is he now advising the City of Durham from his view as City Attorney how to respond to the same lawsuits leveled against himself as the City Manager and other Durham politicos, Police Dept.

There's something (else) rotten in Durham. Who will end up paying for all of this?

Be assured, not AIG.

Anonymous said...

And yet Crystal Mangum goes free. She probably didn't even have to pay for her own "rape exam."

Anonymous said...

I am curious ..... please help me do some math.

$1,245,591.39 is bill attorneys for City of Durham have submitted.

$229,350. is stated amount City of Durham seeks to be reimbursed.

IF the above figure are correct, should Durham now be seeking over
$700,000. ? and not $229,000.
(Appears to be a roughly $500,00. gap --- are Durham taxpayers to pay this, will AIG pay this?)

There appears to be something else rotten in Durham.

If Steptoe is being paid by AIG (and not, as Bell/Baker obviously mis-stated, working pro bono for Durham - yeah, right), and Steptoe is indeed being paid directly by AIG .... may one assume (?correctly?) that Steptoe's fees are not included in $5 million Durham policy (plus first $500,000
that Durham is to pay)?

Once again, is City of Durham attempting to hide legal costs? Is City of Durhams' money being spent to defend cases that are indefensible? WHO made the decision to spend our tax dollars so poorly? WHO decided to misguidedly defend City of Durham agaisnt illegal acts by city employees?

Durham has a problem ....

Concerned Durham Citizen -- (Chatham County and WF are looking better than ever)

Anonymous said...

I would say it means that the City of Durham has been billed another 500,000 from those law-firms. In typical Durham double-speak she said the rates are reduced. What I understand is that they City of Durham has to come up with another $500,000 to add to the $700,000 they have already spent. That makes it 1.2 million they will have spent and no re-embursement in sight.

Steptoe working pro bono for the City of Durham. What a joke! AIG hired them to represent the lawsuit and that cost will more than likely be coming out of the City of Durham's insurnace fund, if the claim is upheld.

The citizens of Durham should be worried, just like Duke.

Anonymous said...

I hope the city will be paying a lot more after the Duke Lacrosse team gets retribution for everything they had to go through at the hands of Duhram's corrupt DA and Police.

Anonymous said...

You can't fix stupid - see Barry Saunders' column this weekend. He helped fan the flames of the hoax now he claims that nothing happened, move along. Barry, say hi to you next tax increase. Will you ever learn? Nah...

Anonymous said...

There could be some coverage
issues in which the insurance carrier might not have to pay. I bet there will be a coverage battle too and Durham could be on the hook for the whole enchalade.