My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03/02/1999 Meeting Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Minutes
>
1999
>
03/02/1999 Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/16/2014 8:42:18 AM
Creation date
1/10/2014 8:45:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
North Olmsted Legislation
Legislation Date
3/2/1999
Year
1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Council Minutes of 3/2/99 <br />~ 2) He has previously reported on the Link case where the city was sued for defamation of <br />;. character because there was an error relative to the passing on of information to a <br />subsequent employer dealing with drug testing. The error was corrected immediately, but <br />Mr. Link chose to file suit against the city. Insurance counsel has been notified that the <br />Law Department will handle this case. Notice was given to Mr. Link's attorney that the <br />city had immunity and that we requested the case be dismissed. If it was not dismissed, <br />we would seek an action for frivolous conduct. A case management conference was set, <br />and Mr. Link's attorney did not show up. It has been reset for another date. Also, the <br />lawyer has not gotten service on the City of North Olmsted. This is not difficult to do- <br />all you need is an address. <br />3) With respect to Manor Care, the Building Department was asked to send the entire file <br />over to the Law Department to be handled as a civil matter rather than a criminal matter. <br />That was done last Friday. Yesterday, the lawsuit was prepared requesting a temporary <br />restraining order, preliminary injunction and permanent injunction as is required by the <br />rules of court in Cuyahoga County. You must notify opposing counsel if you intend to <br />seek a temporary restraining order. Calls were made to Manor Care. We received calls <br />back from corporate counsel in Maryland. Last night about 6:30 p.m., we received a call <br />from local counsel. This morning a tentative agreement was reached-something that <br />would have been reached had we gone to court anyway-that between last night and <br />today the shield was put on the one light that gravitates over onto the adjoining property. <br />We have no idea how that shield is going to work, but have included in the agreement <br />that within the next two or three days we will have a meeting with legal counsel, the <br />Councilman and a Building Department representative to determine what sources of light <br />are gravitating over onto the adjoining property and those sources will be extinguished <br />and abated. If they are not extinguished and abated, then we will go into court and ask <br />the court to issue a temporary restraining order. And presumably, we will go on for a <br />preliminary injunction. In his opinion, this was the most expeditious way of handling this <br />type of a matter. Manor Care was looking for further extensions, telling us that they had <br />ordered the shields and that they would not be in for another month or so, and that just <br />was not acceptable. We are determined to either shield the lights or extinguish the lights. <br />4) Today Assistant Director of Law Jim Dubelko attended a land use seminar. This <br />event is attended annually by either Mr. Gareau or Mr. Dubelko as it a means of <br />becoming up-to-date on zoning matters and related issues. <br />5) A telephone conference was held on the Griffith case to set up schedules for discovery <br />and matters of that nature. This is the case where the city has been sued as a result of a <br />suicide in our jail. Because this is acomputer-generated case, everything is done by <br />phone. <br />Finance Director Copfer: 1) The 1997 Springvale special audit assistant deputy was on <br />site last week to review the work papers and records from the regular 1997 audit. She <br />needs some initial assessment work to be completed and then will be scheduling apre- <br />audit committee meeting with Council to review the recommended procedures to be <br />performed. Mrs. Copfer has made it very clear that she, City Council and the Mayor want <br />to be involved in the front end of this 1997 special audit. The deputy auditor stated that <br />is the Auditor of State's standard operating procedure, and we will be kept on top of it <br />before the costs are incurred. <br />2 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.