 |
Newsletters
Police Chiefs Take Note:
Retaliation Against POA Representatives Violates Constitutional Rights
Chief of Police, Deputy Chief of Police and City Held
Liable for Violating POA President's Civil Rights
By Dieter C. Dammeier
LACKIE & DAMMEIER LLP
A Federal Jury has unanimously ruled that former Alhambra Police Chief Leon Burrus, former Deputy Police Chief Jeffrey Templeman and the City of Alhambra, violated Police Officer Joe Flannagan's constitutional rights by denying him special assignments in retaliation for him making critical statements against City and Police management.
Joe Flannagan, a 23 veteran of the Alhambra Police Department, has been on the Alhambra Police Officers Association Board of Directors for the last 20 years, including four years as its president. As most of you know, Flannagan also has been on the PORAC Board of Directors for the past 17 years. Those of us who know Joe Flannagan, know that Joe is very outspoken when it comes to police officer rights and association representation, both locally in Alhambra and statewide for PORAC.
In his representational capacities, Flannagan had spearheaded numerous activities by the Alhambra Police Officers Association in regard to wage disputes, peace officer rights violations and other actions taken by city and police management adverse to police association members. Activities Flannagan spearheaded included three picketing events in 1994 against the City over wages and working conditions, a vote of no confidence in the city manager in 1994, endorsing of city council candidates running against incumbents in 1996 and 1998, and obtaining an injunction against the Chief of Police Leon Burrus and the City to prevent further violations of the Peace Officer Bill of Rights in 1998. In 1995, Flannagan also initiated a vote to remove Leon Burrus and Jeffrey Templeman from the Association after they refused to pay a dues increase, complaining that they did not support the APOA's political activities.
Although Flannagan has been outspoken throughout most of his career, the problems of retaliation did not arise until Leon Burrus started coming into power in the police department in 1996, as a Captain, and becoming the Chief of Police in 1997 (despite the APOA, through Flannagan, lobbying against the appointment of Burrus to Chief of Police). Starting in 1996, Burrus ordered that Flannagan no longer be used to train other officers. Prior to this, Flannagan had been the department's certified instructor in the use of police baton and other officer safety tactics. In 1997 Burrus removed Officer Flannagan from his instructor position at the Department's Citizen Academy. More significantly, and what ultimately led to the filing of a civil rights lawsuit, was Flannagan's denial of assignment to the Detective Bureau on three consecutive occasions. Flannagan tested for the detective position in 1997, 1998 and 1999, each time ranking number one in the testing process, each time being recommended by the detective supervisors for the position, and each time being denied that position by Jeffrey Templeman and Leon Burrus.
In August of 1999, Flannagan, represented by Dieter Dammeier of LACKIE & DAMMEIER LLP, filed a civil rights lawsuit in Federal District Court, alleging retaliation for acts of expression and assembly protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Due to the time span involved and the numerous witnesses in the case, Flannagan requested assistance of the Legal Defense Fund in his case. The Legal Defense Fund granted coverage for the discovery phase of litigation, enabling Dammeier to depose reluctant department witnesses and develop the evidence required to go forward to trial in the matter.
At the initial stage of litigation, Dammeier offered a settlement proposal to the Defendants, represented by Burke, Williams & Sorensen, proposing that the case be dropped if Flannagan would be given the detective position. True to form in the City of Alhambra, the defendants refused to do the right thing and save the citizens of Alhambra the exorbitant cost of defending a civil rights lawsuit and refused to give into the proposal.
During the discovery phase of the litigation both individual defendants, Burrus and Templeman retired in April, 2000. As expected, without the defendants looming over department witnesses, witnesses became much more cooperative and complete in the information they provided. Defendants, wasting more Alhambra tax payer dollars, made a Motion for Summary Judgment requesting the Court to dismiss the case arguing that there was no direct evidence of retaliation. Dammeier, in response to defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, produced evidence to the Court of the time frames, the multiple adverse actions by the defendants and their implausible excuses for those actions, which convinced the Court to proceed with the case and order a jury trial, which began on July 19, 2000.
At trial, Dammeier presented witnesses establishing that the defendants on numerous occasions expressed dissatisfaction with Flannagan's police associations activities. Documentation was introduced, which was written by Burrus to Flannagan in 1995 which read "I don't share your political beliefs or agree with the tactics you employ to achieve your political ends." In a memorandum by Burrus he described Flannagan as "a wounded dog snapping at everything that moves." Witnesses testified about the adverse actions taken by Burrus and Templeman against Flannagan including the coordinator of the Citizen's Academy where Officer Flannagan was an instructor, who testified that Burrus ordered her to no longer use Flannagan because he was afraid of what Flannagan may say to the class which would be critical of police or city management. Detective bureau supervisors testified about how Flannagan tested for detective in 1997, 1998 and 1999, ranked number one, was recommended by them to Templeman and Burrus, who ultimately overruled their recommendations refusing to give Flannagan the assignment. Even defense witnesses had to admit that Flannagan was a good officer.
Defendants, in a desperate attempt to defend themselves, testified that they had legitimate reasons for taking all of the adverse actions they did against Flannagan. One of the more entertaining points of the trial was when Burrus, under cross-examination by Dammeier, was unable to justify the reason for Flannagan being removed from the instructor's positions at the citizen's academy. Burrus testified that his "legitimate" reason was because Flannagan was no longer a detective and since Flannagan was assigned to be an instructor in the "investigations" course he removed him so that a current detective could teach the course. Dammeier pointed out through documents that Flannagan taught numerous topics in addition to "investigations". Moreover, Dammeier asked Burrus on cross-examination that since Burrus wanted a current detective teaching "investigations" then why did he have a sergeant and officer who were assigned to administrative duties teaching "patrol procedures". It was obvious that the City's highly paid defense team of attorneys did not adequately prepare Burrus for cross-examination.
Templeman while testifying, claimed that in the 1999 detective examination, Flannagan did not in fact rank number one in the testing, but was "tied" for first and he broke the tie giving the position to another officer. Under cross-examination, Dammeier setting the trap for Templeman, got him to admit that Flannagan was a "close second" in the 1999 selection process. Dammeier then asked Templeman why it was then that the second position that opened up in 1999, which was assigned using the same testing process and list (where Flannagan was a "close second") was given to another officer instead of Flannagan? As with Burrus, Templeman could not justify this action in front of the jury. The City's defense team of attorneys must have spent the same time preparing Templeman for cross-examination as they did with Burrus.
After a five day jury trial and two days of jury deliberation, the jury unanimously held that Leon Burrus, Jeffrey Templeman and the City of Alhambra violated Officer Flannagan's civil rights by retaliating against him for him exercising his freedom of speech and expression. In doing so, the jury awarded Flannagan all of his lost back wages as a result of not receiving the detective position and not being able to teach at the citizen's academy on an overtime basis, totaling an amount of $6,301.00. In an apparent effort to look decent in front of the jury, Flannagan had received the detective assignment two weeks prior to the trial commencing, (which if the City would have done early on, could have avoided the expense and embarrassment of a trial) therefore an order by the Court to place Officer Flannagan in the detective assignment was not requested. As in most civil rights cases, a losing defendant is also required to pay costs and attorney's fees, an amount which will likely be over $100,000.00.
Police chiefs throughout the state should think very carefully before holding a grudge against association leaders for them representing their members. As was the case in Alhambra, no matter how sneaky a chief is, it is not difficult to show motive by a pattern of adverse decisions. Fortunately the Legal Defense Fund will be here to continue to protect its members and association leaders from such retaliation.
|
