Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Wednesday, June 1, 2011

SPD's Private No-Bid Law Firm Now Faces Competition: 12 Bidders Attempt to Oust Stafford Frey Cooper

Posted by on Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 5:33 PM

The only firm that can defend a lawsuit against a Seattle cop is Stafford Frey Cooper, which has held a exclusive no-bid contract with the city since the 1980s. According to city records, the firm has averaged $1.8 million in litigation fees annually over the past decade. And that's exactly how the Seattle Police Officers Guild—which has threatened to sue the city if that ever changes—wants it.

But now Stafford Frey Cooper stands to lose its sweetheart deal. For the first time, Stafford Frey Cooper is competing with a whopping 12 law firms that have submitted proposals to represent Seattle police officers who face allegations of wrongful arrest, misconduct, excessive force, or civil-rights violations. (City Attorney Pete Holmes released a request for bids earlier this year from other law firms.) Holmes calls the 12 other bids "weighty proposals."

"Taxpayers will benefit from a competitive legal bidding government," says Holmes. He estimates the city can save $800,000 a year by bringing most legal defense work into his office, letting his attorneys do most of the work Stafford Frey Cooper does now, and selecting these outside bidding law firms to handle cases when the city has a conflict of interest. As for officers, Holmes says, "They will benefit from the wide array of legal talent that have expressed interest in this work."

There were two types of bids. First, in the category of ligation defense, 12 firms submitted bids: Keating, Bucklin & McCormack; Ogden Murphy Wallace; Lee Smart; Cozen O'Connor; Christie Law Group; Patterson Buchanan Fobes Leitch & Kalzer; Northcraft, Bigby & Biggs; Friemund Jackson Tardif & Benedict Garratt; Forsberg & Umlauf; Scheer & Zehnder; Stafford Frey Cooper; and Kenyon Disend. The second category were firms bidding to send a lawyer to scenes where an officer had a significant use of force, any time, day or night. Those three bidders include: Karr Tuttle Campbell; Christie Law Group; and again Stafford Frey Cooper.

Holmes has not released the details of the bids, citing confidentiality agreements. A panel of city officials and outside legal experts will select the top three bidders and make a recommendation. Holmes will pick the winning bidder.

SPOG president Rich O'Neill has said unequivocally in the past that if Holmes accepted bids from other firms, “We will file legal action against the city.” There's still no word from SPOG about legal action.

The conflict—as we've reported in the past—stems from a dispute over whether officers sued for alleged misconduct are entitled to expensive private attorneys at their chosen law firm on the city’s dime. SPOG, a union of roughly 1,350 officers, says they are entitled by nonnegotiable contract terms to those private and expensive lawyers. But the city, namely Holmes, insists cops aren’t entitled to pricey attorneys and that the city's lawyers can handle most of those cases.

 

Comments (9) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Will in Seattle 1
Or ...

The SPD could stop being jerks or protecting jerks in their ranks ...

Nah.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on June 1, 2011 at 6:14 PM
2
Only serious gangsters lawyer up so heavy in advance with the high dollar fixers of the gangs own choosing. Just sayin'...;-Q Of course, in an area of practice where there is SO MUCH criminal conduct and professional malfeasance, I can see the need for lots of defense lawyers...but I think the cops malpractice and professional liability insurance companies should have to pay for the layers to defend the cops, not taxpayers...
Posted by pupuguru on June 1, 2011 at 7:43 PM
3
Why should cops be entitled to anything other then the same attorneys an indigent defendant is entitled to?
Posted by SuperSteve on June 1, 2011 at 8:56 PM
4
With Holmes saving the taxpayers $800,000 on this issue, it should make up for him spending $80,000 to challenge the Seinfeld tunnel referendum.
Posted by Smell on June 1, 2011 at 9:41 PM
seandr 5
Pete Holmes - right on everything.
Posted by seandr on June 1, 2011 at 10:15 PM
6
@ 3 - public defenders would likely be conflicted out in at least some if not many cases. Also, having access to a lawyer (or a doctor) you couldn't otherwise afford is one of the benefits of being in a union.
Posted by UnoriginalAndrew on June 1, 2011 at 10:21 PM
mayor 7
Dominic, please follow up on your way to a 2011 PEN award.
How do our legal expenses compare to similarly-sized cities? Is there any noticeable difference in crime rates or prosecutions of suspects? Of LEOs? Average settlements compared to other departments?
Posted by mayor on June 2, 2011 at 1:12 AM
8
Bigby & Biggs? Seriously? I'd be inclined to think you made that one up if there was any trace of irony elsewhere in this post. What a lovely showcase of the too long (Patterson Buchanan Fobes Leitch & Kalzer!), ridiculous sounding (Umlauf? Really?), and nutty names (Friemund Jackson Tardif & Benedict Garratt? Is that five people or two? And if two, why not make it shorter by using only surnames?) of law firms.
Posted by I have always been... east coaster on June 2, 2011 at 6:47 PM
9
big shocker, the cops want special rights & privileges. bigger shocker, traditionally they've had them!
Posted by philosophy school dropout on June 2, 2011 at 10:21 PM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy