Digre Accuses County of Inadequate Legal Defense

Peter Digre, the controversial former director of Los Angeles County’s Department of Children and Family Services, has sued the county, alleging that it has failed to provide him with adequate legal representation in three lawsuits challenging his actions as head of the troubled child welfare agency.

Digre is named as a co-defendant in each of the three suits, along with the county and other public officials.

In his lawsuit, filed Wednesday, Digre alleges that county lawyers have subordinated his interests to those of the county, refusing to sever the former director from cases to which he says he was only marginally connected. In each case he states that he was forced to hire his own attorneys from Santa Monica-based Spolin & Silverman--which is representing him in his lawsuit--because the county’s appointed lawyers represented clients with conflicting interests.

Because Digre’s involvement in the suits stems from his work for the county, he says his legal defense should be paid for at public expense.

His attorney, Gregory Bright, did not return calls Thursday.

Digre’s lawsuit alleges that the county’s lawyers have “placed the interest of the county (or other high officials) before that of Digre.” The county, it continues, has “turned a deaf ear” toward informal complaints and “forced [Digre] to bring this action.”

Assistant County Counsel Louis Aguilar said the county is trying to resolve the matter informally and hopes to meet with Bright soon. Aguilar added that in none of the cases did the county see a conflict of interest or inadequate representation.

In the first of the three cases in which Digre says he was not adequately represented--one involving a bitter custody dispute with allegations of child abuse-- he was forced to hire his own attorneys because, he alleges, the county’s hired lawyers could not represent him and other officials named in the suit, including Supervisor Mike Antonovich, according to his complaint. Digre’s lawsuit alleges that the county’s lawyers repeatedly interfered with his efforts to defend himself.

In one instance, Digre alleges that the county fought his efforts to get a deposition from Antonovich because they feared that the supervisor, while admitting Digre was not connected to the case, would be asked about his efforts to have a judge removed from the case.

A spokesman for Antonovich said he could not comment because he had not yet seen the lawsuit.

During the second case, involving a series of lawsuits between the county and the operator of a set of group homes that the county closed, Digre alleges that county lawyers wanted him to sign a perjurious declaration stating that he had no knowledge relevant to the case. He declined to sign and, “out of an abundance of caution,” again hired his own counsel.

Aguilar said he was unfamiliar with the details of the case but strongly denied that county lawyers would try to persuade a defendant to sign a perjurious declaration. “That wouldn’t happen,” he said.

In the third case, involving allegations that Digre ignored abusive treatment of the foster children of a political ally, the former director fears the county will allege that he acted outside his governmental duties and should be held personally liable.

Digre came to Los Angeles in 1991 as the county’s child welfare agency was on the brink of being taken over by the state. He was praised for lowering caseloads and launching initiatives, but eventually wore out his welcome among caseworkers, advocates and his bosses on the board--especially Antonovich, his most vocal critic. Last spring, Digre abruptly resigned.