Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Counsel Retention topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Josephine County to Retain Specialized Counsel in Cross v. Sheriff case; estimated cost about $20,000
Summary
County counsel told the Board that the plaintiff and county remain far apart and recommended hiring specialized outside counsel to represent the county in a criminal-related civil action filed by Patrick Timothy Cross against Sheriff Dave Daniel; the Board approved retaining outside counsel by roll call.
Get email alerts on the Legal Counsel Retention topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Josephine County commissioners voted to retain specialized outside counsel to represent the county in a legal matter brought by Patrick Timothy Cross against Sheriff Dave Daniel.
County Counselor Higgs told the Board that the case, filed as part of a criminal matter (Circuit Court case number 22CR37853), has not advanced toward an amicable settlement. Counsel reported discussions with the district attorney and the plaintiff’s counsel and said the parties are “not anywhere near each other” on resolution. Higgs recommended contracting a lawyer experienced in defending law-enforcement officers; he has contacted several firms and received a ballpark estimate of about $20,000 to handle early work, which he described as a comfortable range.
Commissioners asked about timing and availability of firms. Higgs said some firms were unavailable or not specialists in the field; one consulted expert agreed the estimate was reasonable. The case has an initial hearing “in the coming weeks,” and Higgs said moving quickly to retain counsel would let the county request the court’s acceptance of substitution/representation if appropriate.
Commissioner Barnett moved to retain specialized counsel; a second was recorded and the Board approved the motion by roll call (Commissioner Smith Yes; Commissioner Barnett Yes; Commissioner Fleck/Black Yes). The motion carried 3–0.
The Board recorded no additional terms at the meeting aside from the estimated cost range and the intent to proceed; Higgs said he would continue outreach to firms and return with engagement details.
The action does not resolve the underlying litigation; it authorizes the county to retain counsel to represent its interests going forward.

