How many law suits is Oakland facing at this time?

[isourtaxmoneygon e]

I understand the City of Oakland is facing many law suits, does anyone know how many? Why were the suits filed? The former OPD officer suing regarding his discharge, because he reported the insurance scam tisdale had going, seems to have a very strong case. It is ironic that a cop is fired for being honest, and refusing to go along with an insurance fraud! Most PDs fire cops for NOT being honest, mullins runs a little different program! I keep hearing about these law suits, but no one actually gives a number, or what the suits are about. I will say that mullins did send everyone in Oakland a letter stating over $80,000.00 has been spent on the challenge to the last election. He did not break down where that money went, or how much the city has paid the city attorney. Other than that one specific suit, there is always a vague reference to the numerous suits the city is facing. I would really like to know more about these suits. How many are there? What are they about? How much we potentially may have to pay out in judgements, and what the legal costs have been, and are likely to be. If anyone has any real knowledge regarding this, please post, I know I am not the only one that would like to know.

[Oakland News Reader]

I just read in the Oakland News,(front page, main story) where mullins is quoted as saying the town is facing 8 lawsuits at this time. Nothing else was clairified, nor were any specifics give regarding the suits, with the exception of the voter fraud case. In the ballot box stuffing case over $80,000.00 of Oakland City money has been spent, but how that breaks down was also not discussed. We know there is a wrongful discharge case (the officer that reported the insurance scam) and the ballot box stuffing case, that leaves six more. Prehaps others on this board have some knowledge regarding the six other suits. What they are about, how much they are asking-in the way of damages. Along with how much we will spend, and have spent defending these suits. How have we gotten ourselves so far behind the eightball? Legal fees are high, but spending money on legal fees should be carefully studied prior to a defense. Sometimes you are in the wrong and need to settle. I can't believe we are in the right in all eight cases. IMHO, the wrongfully discharged cop, has a case he will win. I also believe the ballot box stuffing case, will be lost by mullins, I don't see how anyone that can count could honestly say the results were fair, and in the spirit of the law.

[4merOfficer]

Oakland News Reader, I have heard that several of the lawsuits are for sexual harassment against tisdale. I don’t know how many, but I do know who filed them, but won’t say on this forum because that would put them through a lot of unnecessary name calling and false accusations.

If you know tisdale, you would know that they probably have a slam dunk case against him and the city of Oakland. I would put nothing past him and I know he is a skirt chaser from way back. I used to feel sorry for his wife because I didn’t think she knew. But after all these years there is no way she could not have known.

We will just have to wait and see them played out in court. But I do believe the ones involved. All they are doing is what is their right to do when something like this is thrust upon them, and against them. Tisdale brought these lawsuits against himself and Oakland by his feeling of power and aggressive behavior against these women that worked with him and in city hall.

Oakland News Reader wrote:

I just read in the Oakland News,(front page, main story) where mullins is quoted as saying the town is facing 8 lawsuits at this time. Nothing else was clairified, nor were any specifics give regarding the suits, with the exception of the voter fraud case. In the ballot box stuffing case over $80,000.00 of Oakland City money has been spent, but how that breaks down was also not discussed. We know there is a wrongful discharge case (the officer that reported the insurance scam) and the ballot box stuffing case, that leaves six more. Prehaps others on this board have some knowledge regarding the six other suits. What they are about, how much they are asking-in the way of damages. Along with how much we will spend, and have spent defending these suits. How have we gotten ourselves so far behind the eightball? Legal fees are high, but spending money on legal fees should be carefully studied prior to a defense. Sometimes you are in the wrong and need to settle. I can't believe we are in the right in all eight cases. IMHO, the wrongfully discharged cop, has a case he will win. I also believe the ballot box stuffing case, will be lost by mullins, I don't see how anyone that can count could honestly say the results were fair, and in the spirit of the law.

[Oakland News Reader]

4merOfficer, thanks for the informative post! Based on what I have heard about tisdale, and everyone in town knows about his "kept" woman, I too would agree, where there's smoke there's fire. To be frank, I wouldn't put that type of behavior past mullins. I don't say that because I don't like him, but because of what I've heard about him, and his "bragging about" Viagra use. The mullins camp acts as if "these" people suing the city are wrong because they are costing us money. This is wrong-headed, and just plain stupid, the blame must go squarely on the shouldes of the wrong doers, and no one else. When we talk about law suits, mullins has been the plaintiff in many a law suit, or should I say, the City of Oakland at the direction of mullins has been the plaintiff in many law suits. The record is quite clear in this regard. I really wonder what the settlements will cost the city, and how much we are spending with the city attorney's law firm. Lastly, the fact that the city attorney is from the same firm mullins has retained to defend him in his criminal case is a clear conflict of interest. All our aldermen should be ashamed of themselves for letting this go-all four of them. A child could see this was not in the best interst of Oakland, maybe in the best interst of mullins, but not Oakland. I have to wonder what comes over normally clear thinking people, once they become an alderman.

[sadie]

The courts approved Mullins lawyers- MEYERS IS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS. This case has cost Mullins Big Bucks from his pocket-not the Town's.

[CONTESSA]

How do you know that the viagra wasn't for use with his wife. Not sticking up for him, but isn't he a l
ittle old to be romping with the girls?

[Oakland News Reader]

sadie wrote:

The courts approved Mullins lawyers- MEYERS IS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS. This case has cost Mullins Big Bucks from his pocket-not the Town's.

I may be wrong, and if so, I'd like to be the first to say so. I was under the impression that Meyers is from the same law firm as is mullins's attorney(s)for him criminal case(s). I don't think Meyers is defending him in the criminal matters, just that I thought he was from the same law firm. If so, the firm bills the city, and the firm bills bill. If this is no longer the case, i.e. mullins criminal attorney(s) do not belong to the same firm as meyer our city attorney, I stand corrected. I will check this out, and will again apologize if I am wrong.
I would expect the same if I am correct.

[Oakland News Reader]

CONTESSA wrote:

How do you know that the viagra wasn't for use with his wife. Not sticking up for him, but isn't he a l
ittle old to be romping with the girls?

I only know what I have heard from others, along with what has been posted, may I suggest you read the string regarding mullins facing divorce.

[Oakland News Reader]

sadie wrote:

The courts approved Mullins lawyers- MEYERS IS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS. This case has cost Mullins Big Bucks from his pocket-not the Town's.

I am sorry for a double reply, but I felt it necessary. Regarding meyers, if he is from the same law firm as are mullins criminal defense lawyers, I stand by my statement that our Aldermen have let the city down. It would not be up to the courts to do what the aldermen should do. They could and should demand we drop meyer as our city attorney, or mullins find new criminal defense, if the lawyers are from the same firm, this is a clear conflict of interst for the people, the tax payers of Oakland. I don't believe you would need a PhD in ethics to understand this. Again if I am wrong regarding the law firms involved here, you can count on my apology. If I am correct, I would expect the same.

[Oakland News Reader]

The city attorney for Oakland, meyers, is an employee of the Law Firm Apperson, Crump and Maxwell, I am under the impression the attorney of record for mullins criminal defense is from Apperson, Crump and Maxwell. Has this changed? If not, I stand by above statements.

[CONTESSA]

Once again, this trial involving THE MAYOR is not coasting The TOWN OF OAKLAND ANY MONIES. BILL MULLINS and his lawyers went to court to see if this would be a conflict and the court ruled NO! MEYERS IS NOT in any way connected to this trial.If you only knew just how much this is costing the Mayor personally, you maybe could understand. SOME OF THE OTHER SUITS AGAINST THE TOWN ITSELF- yes Meyers is involved in those along with other lawyers, not the ones defending the MAYOR on the transmission work.

[ReadMyLips]

Courts didn't approve mullins lawyer, the board of alderman approved it, and they are sure not a "court". Oakland has been caught paying mullins private attorney bills before, so why not again? To me it is a conflict of intrest for the same firm handling mullins criminal case is also where Meyers is employeed and is also the Oakland city attorney!

sadie wrote:

The courts approved Mullins lawyers- MEYERS IS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS. This case has cost Mullins Big Bucks from his pocket-not the Town's.

[ReadMyLips]

CONTESSA, why does your comments and the way you type using caps every so often in your comments look familar. Would you be using another name now. And again, they never went to court to get mullins approved to use the same law firm, the alderman voted to let mullins do it!

CONTESSA wrote:

Once again, this trial involving THE MAYOR is not coasting The TOWN OF OAKLAND ANY MONIES. BILL MULLINS and his lawyers went to court to see if this would be a conflict and the court ruled NO! MEYERS IS NOT in any way connected to this trial.If you only knew just how much this is costing the Mayor personally, you maybe could understand. SOME OF THE OTHER SUITS AGAINST THE TOWN ITSELF- yes Meyers is involved in those along with other lawyers, not the ones defending the MAYOR on the transmission work.

[Oakland News Reader]

I offered, sincerely, to aplogize if I were wrong regarding meyers and mullins criminal attorney belonging to the same law firm. I also expected the same if I were right. It appears, not only are they mis-informed, have zero social ediquette, but also lack any integrity.
Mullins did not go to a court. Mullins informed the aldermen that he was going to use this firm, none of them had any back bone, or common sense, or raised an objection. This is a far cry from having a judge rule on the matter.
Can you imagine a man on trial for a crime, and a judge allowing one of his co-workers to sit on his jury? This is a conflict of interest.
Can you imagine a man working for a law firm hired to be a city attorney, and having his co-workers defending a man accused of stealing from the same city?
Can you say conflict of interest?
I stand by my original post, one need not have a Ph.D. in ethics to understand this is wrong. Again, SHAME on all four of our Aldermen, you have not done your jobs, you have shown zero judgement, and zero leadership in this crisis situation. All employees of Apperson, Crump, and Maxwell should cease being Oakland's city attorney. There must be a clear seperation between the city's legal matters and those of mullins. Anything short of this is unethical, the mere perception of impropriety is one more stain on the reputation of our town. If any of the aldermen care about the future of Oakland, step forward, demand this situation be terminated.

[REP]

I too know that Mullins had to go before the judge to get the ok for these lawyers. The aldermen may have approved them, but it was left up to the court in Somerville. They, him or it had the final say.

OAKLAND is not paying these lawyers to defend Mullins or Tisdale on these charges.

[Oakland News Reader]

I agree the city of Oakland is not paying mullins lawyers, they are paying the firm that pays the lawyers. Oakland is not paying meyers, we are paying the firm that hires meyers. I do not pay the guys that pick up my trash, I pay the city that pays the guys that pick up my trash. Some of the mullins supporters are either really stupid, or really don't understand the concept of a law firm.
What judge did mullins have to go before, in order for the judge to okay that a member of the Tennessee Bar could offer his services as an attorney? If you guys know this judge, please post his name, there will be a court record of this first of its kind ruling.

[tax hawk]

REP wrote:

I too know that Mullins had to go before the judge to get the ok for these lawyers. The aldermen may have approved them, but it was left up to the court in Somerville. They, him or it had the final say.
OAKLAND is not paying these lawyers to defend Mullins or Tisdale on these charges.

Rep, when you say "the judge", there are a lot more than one judge in Tennessee, and lot more than one in Fayette Co., could you be more specific? WHICH judge? When did the Aldermen vote to approve?
I was not aware of an Alderman vote on this issue. If it were a tie vote, would mullins have cast the deciding tie breaker, as usual?
I agree with Reading Oakland News, the Aldermen need to step up, and act like leaders, fire meyers as our city attorney. This is a conflict of interest, for the people of Oakland.

[YourLegalBeagle]

1. Circut Court has only one (1) Judge for the 25th Judical District, that covers 5 Counties, and that is Weber Mccraw. Circut court is a criminal court, and would not hear whether or not mullins could hire a specific attorney.

2. General session court has one (1) Judge for Fayette County, and that would be Judge Mike Whitaker. He rules on cases that can not be given a sentence of more the 11/29. He also would not hear this type of case.

3. Chancery Court has two (2) Chancellors, of which they might have heard this case, but doubtful. But they would be the only ones, so which one was it REP?

REP wrote:

I too know that Mullins had to go before the judge to get the ok for these lawyers. The aldermen may have approved them, but it was left up to the court in Somerville. They, him or it had the final say.
OAKLAND is not paying these lawyers to defend Mullins or Tisdale on these charges.

[trick or treat]

sadie, contessa, rep, bat21, dhead, fatlarry gaines and many others, most stolen. Is one screwed up fool! Poorly educated, lacks a elementary grasp of english, has zero logic, and thinks we don't reconize his bumbling attempts at disguise, and humor. You do cause us to laugh, but we are not laughing with you. Go back to school

[trick or treat]

In previous post, "lacks a elementary" should read: lacks an elementary.
See how easy it is to fix an error