Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

City attorney faces scrutiny over unpaid lawsuit fees

July 22, 2024 | Glendale, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin



Black Friday Offer

Get Lifetime Access to Full Government Meeting Transcripts

Lifetime access to full videos, transcriptions, searches, and alerts at a county, city, state, and federal level.

$99/year $199 LIFETIME
Founder Member One-Time Payment

Full Video Access

Watch full, unedited government meeting videos

Unlimited Transcripts

Access and analyze unlimited searchable transcripts

Real-Time Alerts

Get real-time alerts on policies & leaders you track

AI-Generated Summaries

Read AI-generated summaries of meeting discussions

Unlimited Searches

Perform unlimited searches with no monthly limits

Claim Your Spot Now

Limited Spots Available • 30-day money-back guarantee

This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

City attorney faces scrutiny over unpaid lawsuit fees
During a recent government meeting, a significant discussion arose regarding the outstanding payments related to an open records lawsuit against the city. A representative for the plaintiff raised concerns about the remaining balance of $6,148.50 owed for court costs and attorney's fees, following an initial payment of $8,566.45 made on May 31st. This payment only covered expenses incurred through the circuit court, while additional costs arose from the city's appeal to the court of appeals, bringing the total owed to $14,714.95.

The city attorney acknowledged the oversight in the payment process, explaining that there had been a miscommunication regarding the itemization of costs. He noted that an agreement had been reached with the plaintiff's counsel to waive appeal rights in exchange for the payment of the requested amounts. However, it was revealed that the itemization submitted only accounted for costs up to the circuit court's ruling, leading to the current discrepancy.

The city attorney assured that the issue was being addressed and that the correct payment amount would be processed. He communicated that he had informed both the mayor and the city administrator about the situation and had been in contact with the plaintiff's counsel to resolve the matter promptly. An email confirming the additional payment was expected to be sent soon, indicating the city's commitment to fulfilling its financial obligations in this case.

View full meeting

This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.

View full meeting

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Wisconsin articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI