The Williamson County Sun and the Austin American-Statesman newspapers (29 Oct. 2015) have covered this saga and reported that the evidence supporting the firing (twice) was not credible. A hearing examiner found that Officer Hoskins-Brown had indeed taken her boyfriend's prescription drug, for which she also had a valid prescription, but that the charges of ingesting mescaline and lying were not provable under the law. The police chief had placed Officer Hoskins-Brown on indefinite suspension, effectively fired, on June 13, 2013. The hearing examiner ordered Officer Hoskins-Brown reinstated after serving a 15 day suspension on November 1, 2013 with back pay and benefits.
The following day, the chief fired Hoskins-Brown for a second time on the grounds that she could no longer perform her duties because the county and district attorneys found her to be untruthful and refused to accept any cases she filed. Since the second firing was not for disciplinary reasons, the city said her firing was not subject to appeal. A trial court agreed with the city, but the Court of Appeals has ruled that the trial court does have jurisdiction and referred the case to the trial court for further proceedings. The Appeals Court ordered the city to pay the legal fees for the appeal.
Since the Appeals Court ruling, both the District and County Attorneys have publicly recanted their prior statements about Officer Hoskins-Browns credibility as a witness.
The city has now appealed the Court of Appeals ruling to the Texas Supreme Court. Why is the city doing this?
Are they trying to "save face" over a really bad decision?
How much money is this costing the city? Do they really have a Dallas based high-dollar law firm pursuing this effort? How much does the law firm charge? $500+ per hour?
Hoskins-Brown has offered publicly to settle with the city, but, the city has rejected those offers. WHY?
If the city loses, they have to pay all the litigation costs and pay Officer Hoskins-Brown damages, back pay and benefits.
If the city wins, what have they won? They have established no great legal principle. They are responsible for all the city's legal costs and they saved a few bucks for Officers Hoskins-Brown's back pay and benefits.
The city has already damaged its reputation as being fair and equitable to it's employees and has established itself as a litigious city, which is not good.
Taking employees to court is not a good example for Georgetown to set.
No comments:
Post a Comment