Council Members Remain Liable in Suit

A federal judge has ruled that Los Angeles City Council members must go to trial in a $20-million police brutality lawsuit stemming from the slaying of three robbers by a special police unit, and that they can be held personally liable for damages.

The ruling, made Monday by U.S. District Judge J. Spencer Letts, came in a civil case filed on behalf of Johanna Trevino, the 2-year-old daughter of one of the slain men. Officers of the Los Angeles Police Department’s Special Investigations Squad shot and killed the robbers, and seriously wounded a fourth, after a Feb. 12, 1990, holdup at a McDonald’s restaurant in Sunland.

The girl’s lawsuit is identical to an earlier suit filed by the lone survivor of the shooting and other family members. They won $44,000 in damages from then-Police Chief Daryl F. Gates and nine SIS officers.

In the new case, the 15 City Council members were named as additional defendants because they voted in April to indemnify Gates and the officers and pay the damages in the earlier suit out of city coffers. Trevino’s attorney, Stephen Yagman, called the council’s decision to pay Gates’ damages a “ratification of the LAPD policy of excessive force” that made the council members personally liable for damages in the new suit.

The city attorney’s office had sought to have the council members dismissed from the suit, arguing that as elected officials they had “legislative immunity.”

But Monday, Letts agreed with Yagman and refused to dismiss the City Council members from the case. He said he would issue a written order later.

Deputy City Atty. Don Vincent criticized the decision, saying the threat of council members having to pay legal damages out of their own pockets would have a chilling effect on city operations.

“It has always been an assumption that they had legislative immunity,” Vincent said of the council members. “If they don’t have immunity, pretty soon they won’t act on anything. They will be afraid.”

He said the city would probably appeal the decision, but declined further comment until a written decision from the judge is issued. Council members declined immediate comment.

In the first case, the jury agreed with the contentions of the surviving robber and relatives of the dead men that SIS officers violated the robbers’ civil rights by shooting them without cause.

That suit maintained that Gates was responsible because he fostered and condoned excessive force by his officers. The jury set a relatively low damage assessment of $44,042--about half of which Gates was ordered to pay--to “send a message” about police use of force. Jury members said they believed the money should come out of the pockets of the police chief and SIS officers personally, not from taxpayers.

The latest case is set to go to trial in March. If council members are found liable for damages, they would have to pay them personally because by law they cannot vote to indemnify themselves, both Yagman and Vincent said.

However, Vincent said the city has strong grounds for an appeal because the council “is entitled to absolute legislative immunity. They can’t be held liable.”