Cochise County supervisors retain outside counsel and approve lawsuit to recover $130,000 settlement

Cochise County supervisors voted 3-0 Sept. 30 to retain Timothy Lasota as outside counsel to represent the board in matters related to the jail-district litigation and then approved initiating a lawsuit to recover a $130,000 settlement tied to case CV2023-00363.

The move came during a special meeting in the Board of Supervisors hearing room at 1415 Melody Lane in Bisbee. Supervisors Crosby, Gomez and Chairman Antonori were present; Crosby attended remotely.

The retention vote preceded public comment in which Allison Morse opposed hiring Lasota and filing suit. Morse said she reviewed an earlier March 27 meeting and the settlement and expressed concern about legal spending and Lasota’s public stances. "He's been legal counsel for Carrie Lake and Abe Hamadeh and Mark Finchem, all related to baseless, unproven election fraud," Morse said. She also questioned whether the settlement constrained speech, saying, "there's nothing in this settlement that I can see that prohibits [him] from exercising his First Amendment right to free speech." Morse added that she believed the litigation would come shortly before a local election and called it "upsetting."

Supervisor Antonori said the county hired Lasota because of a conflict of interest within the county attorney’s office that prevented internal counsel from leading the review. Antonori described the retention as the first step: Lasota and the county’s civil deputy attorney, Correa, will brief the board on whether grounds exist and on the likelihood of success before the board makes any final litigation decisions. Antonori said, "That decision will be made again after we hear from our attorneys. This is only to initiate the process because we're going — we already, well, just hired Mr. Lasota. Now we are going to have him begin the process of taking a look at this potential lawsuit, and then he will brief us on whether or not he believes there's grounds and what the likelihood of success would be, and then the board will make a decision on whether or not to proceed."

Despite that description of process, the board subsequently approved a separate motion, offered and seconded on the record, to initiate a lawsuit against Daniel LaChance to recover the $130,000 settlement amount in case CV2023-00363; that motion also passed, 3-0.

The board did not provide detailed legal analysis or a public timeline for filing; Antonori said the board will meet again in a special session and executive session for attorneys to brief supervisors before additional decisions are made. The county attorney’s office remains involved in an advisory capacity, Antonori added, but outside counsel will lead the review because of the stated conflict.

Morse raised figures she said were already spent on related litigation: she said the county had paid about $84,000 to Craig Morgan and "at least $25,000" to Lasota, and argued continuing litigation would burden taxpayers. Those amounts were presented by the commenter and were not disputed or confirmed on the record during the meeting.

The actions approved at the meeting were limited to (1) retaining Lasota to represent the board in the matter and (2) approving initiation of a lawsuit to recover the $130,000 settlement. Supervisors did not adopt any additional policy or settlement terms during the session.

The meeting adjourned after the votes; the board announced its next scheduled item would be a flood control district work session to receive an update on district issues.