Somehow missed this in January, must have been wrapped up in All Things Trump. Anyway, so NYC has agreed to pay $75M (less fees, will be $56.5M total to claimants) for hundreds of thousands of bogus summonses, like a quarter of all issued. Including mine! Which is why it came to my attention, I'm getting up to a 150$ piece of this pie, depending on how many claimants there are. According to my math, I should be getting at LEAST 50$, so that's nice. Anyway, the case is Stinson v. NYC. It covers all summonses from 2007 through now that were thrown out for legal insufficiency. Here are a few words on it from NYT:
Quote:
The lawsuit, filed in 2010, alleged that under an unlawful “pattern and practice” enforced by city officials, police officers were told to issue summonses “regardless of whether any crime or violation” had occurred in order to meet a minimum quota requirement — an allegation the city explicitly denied in the proposed deal.
But under the settlement, the city agreed to send out departmentwide notifications to reiterate its policy that quotas and numerical performance goals were banned, that supervisors who put them in place could be subject to disciplinary action and that officers who believed they had been threatened or retaliated against for failing to comply with a quota should notify the department’s Internal Affairs Bureau.
|
Quote:
The settlement could be nearly double the $41 million that the city paid to five men in 2014 to resolve the so-called Central Park jogger lawsuit, concerning their overturned convictions in the 1989 beating and rape of a woman. But the amount is less than the $98 million settlement (not including legal fees) reached that same year in a discrimination case against the Fire Department.
Because of the large number of potential claims — the 900,000 summonses represent about one-quarter of all such summonses issued during the period — the deal lays out a process of notifying people who are eligible for compensation, which has been set at a maximum of $150 per person per incident.
|
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/23/n...ssed.html?_r=0
BTW, the notification process mentioned above is apparently working. Although receiving a letter with the exterior envelope marked "NYPD SUMMONS" did give me pause. And not a good pause!
Here are a few words from NYDN a few years ago regarding the NYPD hiding docs relating to this case:
Quote:
|
The NYPD and city lawyers are engaging in a “stunning pattern” of evidence destruction in a high-stakes class-action case alleging cops have issued 850,000 bogus summonses due to a quota system, new documents charge.
|
Quote:
“The (evidence) production confirms what plaintiffs feared but defendants have repeatedly denied: Defendants have destroyed evidence that is unquestionably relevant to this matter.”
To make matters worse, the NYPD has an on-the-books policy of shredding reams of documents potentially relevant to the case, Sutton’s 15-page letter charges.
“Defendants have shredded, and are continuing to shred, hard-copy documents” from CompStat meetings where crime statistics are analyzed by NYPD brass, court documents claim, citing testimony from a lieutenant who managed the CompStat unit of the Office of the Chief of Department.
Monthly activity reports in which supervisors provide written feedback on individual officers’ “enforcement activity” are also being destroyed, Sutton alleges.
|
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.2282345
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
