Buying their Silence
From Michigan Transparency Wiki
Nov. 25, 2009 FOIA Settlement Story
- November 25, 2009 C & G News, City ordered to pay settlement reached on wrongful arrest lawsuit. Deeper Analysis: City Attorney Actually Tells Court he was "Buying their Silence" with attempted settlement agreement.
An interesting mention of FOIA's impact in an unrelated case where a City government settled a lawsuit with a confidentiality agreement the City attempted to require in the settlement. The Court tosses an attempt by City to overturn settlement agreement because defendants spoke about the case and amount, reasoning that City was subject to FOIA and could not legally withhold a settlement agreement if it so chose, even though no FOIA request had yet been filed. An interesting case for those interested in settlement agreements, although it is only a Circuit Court decision. Here's a short clip from the story:
According to the court transcript of a Nov. 12 hearing, attorney for the officers T. Joseph Seward testified that the confidentiality agreement was more about making sure no disparaging comments were made about the city and the officers than about keeping the dollar amount sealed, which was ultimately subject to the Freedom of Information Act anyway.
“I recognize that because of the Freedom of Information Act there’s a chance, even a good chance that the actual dollar amount would be disclosed,” he said, according to transcript. “That’s why we insisted and always insist that there be no types of discussions, any type of disparaging remarks or comments that somehow we were wrong, the defendants were wrong or that they admitted to (being) wrong. We were buying their silence.”
After the judge’s decision, attorney for the two Canadian men, David Robinson, said the confidentiality agreement wasn’t necessary because of FOIA. “It was a big waste of time,” he said. “What was this exercise all about? And the taxpayers are paying for it. It’s a waste of resources.”
Back to Main Page
Other News about FOIA
