City Council Liability on the Line in Police-Brutality Suit : Courts: Plaintiff seeks money directly from the members, but will settle for a $1-million annuity for the 4-year-old daughter of one of the victims.

A police brutality trial that begins today in federal court could lead to a groundbreaking ruling forcing Los Angeles City Council members to pay damages out of their own pockets for votes they cast in council.

The lawsuit alleges among other things that council members are personally liable for the actions of officers from the LAPD’s Special Investigations Section who shot four robbers after a holdup at a McDonald’s restaurant in Sunland on Feb. 12, 1990.

The lawsuit contends that when the council members voted to use city funds to pay damages assessed against the officers in a trial two years later, they approved of misconduct and so should share in the blame.

Relatives of the robbers sued former Los Angeles Police Chief Daryl Gates and nine officers nine days after the shooting, contending that the police shot the men without provocation and that Gates was responsible for the way the department was run.

Police said they opened fire because the men pulled pistols, which were subsequently shown to be air guns. Three were killed and one was wounded.

A jury found in favor of the families in March, 1992, and assessed just over $44,000 in punitive damages against Gates and the officers--saying the amount was deliberately set low enough so that it would be paid by the officers, not the taxpayers. But the City Council subsequently voted to pay the damages, a common decision in cases involving city employees who are sued over actions they took in the line of duty.

Stephen Yagman, the attorney representing the families, subsequently filed an identical lawsuit asking for unspecified damages from the city, the council members and police, on behalf of 4-year-old Johanna Trevino, daughter of Javier Trevino, one of the slain robbers. She was born seven days after her father was killed.

The Los Angeles city attorney’s office tried to get the suit dismissed, citing the common legal doctrine that lawmakers cannot be sued personally for votes they cast as part of their official duties.

But in July, 1992, U.S. District Court Judge J. Spencer Letts rejected the city’s position, a decision upheld by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled unanimously that the decision to pay the police officers’ damages was an administrative, not a legislative, action.

The city appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which refused to hear the case, setting the stage for this week’s trial.

*

Chief Assistant City Atty. James Pearson said the trial will be broken into two phases.

First, a jury must determine whether to award the child compensatory damages for the loss of her father and, if it does, how much. An award of compensatory damages would stem from the previous jury’s finding that officers used excessive force when they shot the robbers.

Second, the jury must determine whether the City Council members can be held personally liable for voting to use city funds to cover the punitive damages assessed against Gates and the officers.

Pearson said the council members did not violate anyone’s constitutional rights when they decided to pay the punitive damages because there is no legal precedent for such a contention.

“We strongly feel there is no basis for there to be damages,” he said.

Pearson also said his office, which has retained former Atty. Gen. John Van de Kamp to serve as an adviser in the case, plans to file a motion this week seeking a delay in the second phase of the trial.

Yagman said Monday that although he has offered on at least two occasions to settle the case, it is in the public’s best interest that it go to trial.

“When the government steps in and saves a bad public official from (the consequences of) wrongdoing, it is the public that is hurt,” Yagman said.

Yagman said jurors must also decide whether the LAPD officers were in the habit of using excessive force and, if so, whether the city and the council members should be held liable for the development of such a habit.

Yagman said he contacted Pearson Saturday and offered to drop the suit if the city would agree to set up an annuity for the child. Pearson said that he plans to present Yagman’s $1 million offer to city officials this week and that a settlement in the case is still possible.

The girl is expected to be present in court for the trial, Yagman said.

In the incident that resulted in the suit, 19 members of the Special Investigations Section followed four men suspected in a string of restaurant robberies. They trailed them from Venice to Sunland and watched as they broke into the closed McDonald’s about 1 a.m. and robbed the lone employee inside, who was unharmed.

After the robbers got into their car, the officers moved in. They testified they fired 35 rounds from shotguns and handguns when the robbers pointed weapons at them. It was later learned that they were unloaded pellet guns, not firearms.