Editorial: A legal victory with complications

The Connecticut Superior Court ruling Tuesday validated State Rep. John Santanella's complaint. This is a clear win, and allows him to avoid an August 11 Democratic primary against his challenger, former town attorney Tom Tyler. Tyler can appeal, but absent that, Santanella can shift his focus to November. But a winning legal outcome is not the same as a winning narrative outcome. This was an honest mistake by the Tyler campaign, a consequence of some flawed official guidance and a decision to rely on that guidance. The court found that the Democratic registrar provided petition sheets four days before state law allowed, and that the state-supplied forms lacked a legally required statement from circulators on the number of signatures gathered — a defect that invalidated all of Tyler's petitions. The ruling also notes that there was no evidence the Tyler campaign exercised due diligence to confirm the official guidance. Connecticut election law doesn't allow for honest mista...
Post a Comment

Enfield to Pay Over $1 Million in Legal Fees After Violating Disability Rights


AI generated art 



Enfield is on the hook for more than $1 million in legal fees after a federal court ruled that the town and its Board of Education violated federal disability laws by failing to accommodate Sarah Hernandez, an autistic and deaf elected official.

In 2017, Ms. Hernandez was a newly elected school board member. Instead of providing reasonable accommodations for her to participate in board meetings fully, the town chose to fight a multi-year federal legal battle.

After about five years, a U.S. District Court jury ruled in January 2024 that Enfield discriminated against Ms. Hernandez in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). She won little in damages from the court, but the court later issued a permanent injunction requiring the town not to discriminate against people with disabilities. The town had to pay her legal cost, and that bill has arrived.

On March 7, the U.S. District Court in Bridgeport ordered Enfield to pay $964,366 in attorneys' fees and $60,579 in litigation costs, bringing the total judgment to just over $1 million. 

The Town Council is set to discuss the court's decision at its meeting on Monday. It will likely do so in executive session.

Barring any avenues of appeal, Enfield appears to be liable for the full amount.

A jury ruled in the case last year, finding that Enfield "Excluded Ms. Hernandez from equal participation," among other findings. It only won $10 in damages from the jury, but Enfield was still responsible for legal plaintiffs legal costs.  

Ms. Hernandez attorneys originally sought $1.3 million. 

The Cost to Enfield is Higher

The $1.024 million Enfield must pay only covers Hernandez's legal fees and litigation expenses. It does not include what Enfield spent on its legal defense. The total cost to taxpayers could be significantly higher. The council should disclose the total cost of this case.

A Case of Systemic Discrimination

Hernandez required basic accommodations, such as written communications and having speakers face her so she could read lips. She wanted access to written documents in executive sessions.

Enfield's Settlement Offer

In 2023, Enfield made a pre-trial offered Hernandez $75,000 to settle the case, but it was rejected, in part, because the offer didn't include any commitment to change its behavior, something U.S. District Court Judge Stefan Underhill, noted in his decision. In his ruling, Judge Stefan: "Although the total dollar amount of fees may be high compared to the amount of monetary damages awarded by the jury, it reasonably reflects the five years of effort required to litigate this case, considering the significant opposition that Hernandez faced at each stage of the litigation." 



Comments

New comments are not allowed.