Cop Says He Was Fired For Reporting Police Dog Attack
Ethics
The City of Hernando, Miss., illegally fired a police officer for testifying truthfully about another officer's use of unreasonable force - letting a police dog attack and bite a citizen who already was in custody - Steven English claims in Federal Court.
English says he saw a fellow officer unreasonably sic a dog on Lawson Rhoda in November 2004, after Rhoda was in custody. English says he reported the attack to his supervisor, "who instructed Plaintiff to keep his opinions to himself."
"Because supervisor Gray had instructed plaintiff to keep his opinion to himself, and because plaintiff knew that he would be fired if he disobeyed his supervisor's instruction by reporting the use of unreasonable force, plaintiff did not initially report the use of unreasonable force. Instead, plaintiff filed a police report which omitted any discussion of the dog's attack upon the suspect," the complaint states. English says his police report was accurate, but omitted mention of the dog attack. "To report this attack would have been a direct disobedience of the supervisor's instructions. However, in keeping with his duty as a citizen, plaintiff kept a complete record of the incident so that his memory would be fresh if he were asked about the incident in the future, and so that he could give an accurate statement about what occurred."
In 2007, Rhoda sued the city alleging unreasonable force. English says the city's insurance company and police chief, "Riley," questioned him about the incident, and he "truthfully answered their questions and truthfully described the criminal assault he had witnessed."
The city suspended and then fired him in retaliation, English says, on the bogus grounds that "he had not truthfully reported the use of excessive force in his police report."
He demands monetary damages. He is represented by Jim Waide of Tupelo.
Related listings
-
Bipolar Lawyer Who Stole: Suspended, Not Disbarred
Ethics 07/16/2008An attorney will not be disbarred for misappropriating client's funds during a manic bipolar episode that lasted for 4 years, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled in a 4-3 decision. Mark Belz was diagnosed with bipolar disorder in 1975 and had been on me...
-
Judge Blasts Curbing Frequent ADA Filer
Ethics 04/10/2008The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has again upheld a “vexatious litigant” order against a frequent filer of disability discrimination lawsuits -– but over the strenuous objections of nine dissenting judges.Chief Judge Alex Kozinski was particular...
-
Op-ed: Standing Up for Rule of Law in Pakistan
Ethics 04/08/2008We have witnessed with admiration and empathy the heroism of lawyers and judges in Pakistan as they squarely faced beatings and stood up to soldiers and police to defend the rule of law. Thedissolution of the Supreme Court, the silencing of a f...
Workers’ Compensation Subrogation of Administrative Fees and Costs
When a worker covered by workers’ compensation makes a claim against a third party, the workers’ compensation insurance retains the right to subrogate against any recovery from that third party for all benefits paid to or on behalf of a claimant injured at work. When subrogating for more than basic medical and indemnity benefits, the Texas workers’ compensation subrogation statute provides that “the net amount recovered by a claimant in a third‑party action shall be used to reimburse the carrier for benefits, including medical benefits that have been paid for the compensable injury.” TX Labor Code § 417.002.
In fact, all 50 states provide for similar subrogation. However, none of them precisely outlines which payments or costs paid by a compensation carrier constitute “compensation” and can be recovered. The result is industry-wide confusion and an ongoing debate and argument with claimants’ attorneys over what can and can’t be included in a carrier’s lien for recovery purposes.
In addition to medical expenses, death benefits, funeral costs and/or indemnity benefits for lost wages and loss of earning capacity resulting from a compensable injury, workers’ compensation insurance carriers also expend considerable dollars for case management costs, medical bill audit fees, rehabilitation benefits, nurse case worker fees, and other similar fees. They also incur other expenses in conjunction with the handling and adjusting of workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation carriers typically assert, of course, that, they are entitled to reimbursement for such expenditures when it recovers its workers’ compensation lien. Injured workers and their attorneys disagree.