1. The Decision.
2. Summary of the case.
3. This decision.
4. Application.
1. The Decision.
The Massachusetts Appeals Court, on October 10, 2012, awarded $298,349.33 in lawyers fees and Court Costs to Malvina Monteiro as perhaps the final decision in a court case in which Courts and Jury have strongly condemned Cambridge’s destruction of a Black female department head in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complain.
The Appeals Court docket number is 2010-P-1240. My source is Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, October 22, 2012, page 20, Lawyers Weekly No. 11-152-12.
2. Summary of the case.
For the Superior Court judge’s key opinion, please see http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/judge-issues-decision-denying.html.
For the Appeals Court panel’s key communication, please see http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/appeals-court-decision-in-monteiro.html.
Malvina Monteiro was head of Cambridge’s Police Review Board until the consequences of her filing a civil rights action alleging disparate treatment because of her sex.
According to judge, jury and appeals court panel, she was fired in retaliation for the women’s right complaint.
She lost on the merits of the actual complaint.
The jury awarded $1,062,040.00 in actual damages and $3,500.000 penal damages.
The judge supported the jury decision. Her opinion goes into great detail analyzing the testimony of the Cambridge City Manager and using his testimony to condemn his behavior. The key word she used was “reprehensible” with regard to his behavior.
The appeals court panel refused to dignify Cambridge’s appeal with a formal opinion.
“Ample evidence” of “outrageous conduct.”
The check to Monteiro ran $8,300,000.
The Cambridge City Manager, on June 12, 2012, reported to the Cambridge City Council payments to outside counsel of $2,144,000 from the 1998 complaint to the 2008 trial, and $288,409.00 for the appeal.
Cambridge Day, on June 21, 2012, calculated payments on this and four related cases to come to $14,469,558.00
3. This decision.
The court stated, quoting the most relevant part of the MLW entry:
“. . .(i) We agree with the petitioning counsel that an extremely aggressive appellate campaign by the City demanded proportionate response work. (ii) The extensive supporting materials for the petition show that Monteiro’s appellate counsel responded with disproportionately less expenditure of time than exercised by counsel for the City. In particular, the materials show that counsel for the City employed nine attorneys upon the appeal and accumulated 1,368.8 hours of work, so as to generate a cumulative bill of fees and costs of $693,623.55.. . . .
“By contrast, counsel for Monteiro employed four attorneys, accrued 650.8 hours of work and generated the itemized fees of $284,420, and costs of $13,929.33, for a total of $298,349.33.
“Beyond the comparison of hourly volumes, several features of petitioning counsel’s itemization of time and services support our impression of their work. . . .
“Lead counsel at trial performed 84% of the hourly work invested in the appeal. That allocation employed the knowledge of the attorney most experienced with the litigation. In particular, it eliminated the dangers of excess and duplication most commonly generated by the assignment of multiple attorneys ato an appeal, especially attorneys who are unfamiliar with the earlier phases of a case.”
4. Application.
Jury, judge and appeals court panel are in agreement that the Cambridge City Manager committed malfeasance in office in his destruction of the life of Malvina Monteiro.
The Cambridge City Council and the Cambridge Machine see no problems. There has been exactly zero attempts to implement the Court decisions by firing him even though the decisions would justify firing him without golden parachute and possibly without pension.
But The Cambridge Machine and the Cambridge City Council love to claim they are pro Civil Rights, pro Women’s Rights and much, much, much holier than thou.
