Patterico's Pontifications

9/17/2007

L.A. Considering Giving Tennie Pierce a Big Wad of Cash

Filed under: General,Race,Scum — Patterico @ 12:14 am



Christine Pelisek of the L.A. Weekly reports that Los Angeles may settle with Tennie Pierce. He is the black firefighter who wants millions of dollars for eating dog food; the firefighter who hazed other firefighters, and then sued when he himself was hazed.

Last fall, many in Los Angeles (including yours truly) were outraged when the City Council voted to pay Pierce $2.7 million. It emerged that the dog food prank followed closely on the heels of a volleyball game in which Pierce went around spiking the ball in people’s faces and yelling that he was the “big dog.” As the L.A. Weekly summarized its findings:

In a three-month investigation, the Weekly has learned that the crew present when Pierce ate dog food was not “nine white members,” as Pierce claimed in an emotional plea to a packed City Council chamber on November 28; that a taunting incident cited by Pierce as proof of harassment and retaliation was actually led by a black firefighter; that leaders of a respected black firefighters’ organization refuse to call what happened to Pierce race-based; and that Pierce called it “water under the bridge” — before hiring an attorney.

Pelisek says that, despite the fact that the mayor previously vetoed the $2.7 million dollar settlement, the city is considering settling again:

Last week, the City Attorney’s office sent a letter to members of the city council, the city Claims Board and the council’s Budget and Finance Committee, asking to meet in closed session to discuss a settlement with Pierce’s attorney Genie Harrison. The case is scheduled to go to trial September 24.

The settlement discussion is scheduled for today’s Budget and Finance Committee, chaired by City Council member Bernard Parks, who, along with two other black council members, Jan Perry and Herb Wesson, strongly favors settling the Pierce case and is rumored to be lobbying other council members to settle. A potential settlement deal may go before city council for a vote as early as Wednesday.

However, possibly blurring the issue are new photos that have allegedly emerged showing Pierce engaged in more hazing at one of his former posts, Station 61. If even more hazing photos emerge, it might be harder for the city attorney’s office to convince council members to forgo trial.

Everyone is quaking in their boots because Pierce’s lawyer recently cleaned up, winning a $6.2 million verdict for another black plaintiff from the fire Department. So, even though Pierce has no case under any common-sense view of the situation, his lawyers are emboldened.

The City Attorney wants to revive the $2.7 million offer. Pierce’s lawyers are offering to settle for $3.1 million — a figure even higher than the one already rejected by the mayor. And the L.A. Times reports that the council is mulling over figures ranging between $990,000 and $1.9 million.

This guy should not get one dime. Unfortunately, it seems that the city is too scared to take the matter to trial and secure this just outcome.

Get ready to open your wallets.

UPDATE: Pierce has settled for almost $1.5 million. My reaction to that is here.

14 Responses to “L.A. Considering Giving Tennie Pierce a Big Wad of Cash”

  1. If they pay for this sum via deductions from city council paychecks, I have no problem with it. Otherwise, the city council should grow a spine and tell “big dog” to get a real job and join the real world.

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  2. How many more of these type of lawsuits will be filed the day after they settle with Pierce?

    gahrie (5ae14f)

  3. In addition, apparently the city hired outside counsel to the tune of $1 million. That million produced a recommendation to settle.

    What a city! You’d think it wasn’t their own money!

    ManlyDad (d62cf6)

  4. Why does anyone ever bother working anymore in your city?

    This is obviously the path to wealth.

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  5. The city council is probably most afraid of the LA jury pool. You know, the ones that set OJ free ? We had a meeting with a councilwoman on another subject last spring. Someone brought up the “dogfood” case and she went on a rant about “boys” and their misbehavior. I suspect the council has had its mind made up for a long time. No room for logic or common sense there. I’m glad I don’t live in LA.

    Mike K (86bddb)

  6. If anybody thinks the tort defense bar is on the public’s side on this …? The tort plaintiffs’ bar, the tort defense bar and the insurance industry are a Charybdis which churns and sucks down everything that comes within reach of its maw. The plaintiffs’ lawyers make money, the defense lawyers make money and the insurance companies make money. The people lose. If there is to ever be meaningful tort reform all the lawyers and insurance companies must be kept out of the debate.

    nk (474afa)

  7. nk,

    Isn’t that the problem? It’s a ‘legal’ issue, not a debate? Debates seldom have a pot of gold at the end of the discourse. The legal system has evolved into an industry in and of itself. Not only self perpetuating, but seemingly able to expand at will. In a three pronged arrangement you have lawyers by education or professional heavily ensconced in the legislative branch, a judiciary completely self-serving and self-protecting, and an administration with I’d hazard to guess rife with law degreed personnel. See a trend?

    allan (d38ee9)

  8. How many more of these type of lawsuits will be filed the day after they settle with Pierce?

    A lot … it will set a horrific precedent.

    I happen to work for a insurance company, specializing in litigated public sector claims, and here in the midwest, we would never consider settlement of this matter. I say that only based on the information available. I cannot imagine going to my VP to ask for that kind of settlement authority, but then again, we are not spending someone else’s money.

    JD (f6a000)

  9. But is this case with Pierce anything like that other case the lawyer cleaned up on? If so, you’d think we’d have read about THAT in the L.A. Weekly by now. “Quaking in their boots”? They damn well should be quaking–if they pay out our money to this total fraud. Crap like this makes a complete mockery of REAL racist nonsense(which I’m sure does happen–and not always white on black either, btw, but we know that in the Real World).

    Moto (f07e33)

  10. That is an extraordinary amount to consider as a settlement. That would be an extraordinary amount as a verdict.

    JD (f6a000)

  11. Wait. How much dogfood do you have to eat for 3 Mil?

    Dan Collins (fd2378)

  12. Has anyone checked the immigration status of the suits at City Hall? It sure sounds like people doing jobs Americans won’t do.

    Another Drew (8018ee)

  13. Speaking of frivolous litigation:

    Dan Rather is suing CBS for $70 million.

    Leviticus (3c2c59)

  14. The U.S is unfortunately a society that needs healing. They talk about freedom, but it really does not exist. The minorities still suffer. I would say, they need to do some “house cleaning’ of their own before they can go cleaning up other’s places.”

    Leaveacomment (b0a422)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0690 secs.