Minnesota
Man drops suit over taking free grocery samples
ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) — A Minnesota man who filed a lawsuit saying that he was confronted and beaten outside a grocery store for taking too many free food samples has dropped his legal challenge.
Erwin Lingitz, 69, filed his lawsuit in federal court last March seeking at least $375,000 in damages for the 2010 incident at the Cub Foods store in White Bear Lake.
Lingitz’s lawsuit said he left his wife in the car while he went inside the store to pick up her prescription and was offered free food samples along with additional samples for his wife, the Star Tribune reported.
A security guard confronted Lingitz outside the store and a struggle ensued. An off-duty sheriff’s deputy joined in the struggle and tried to handcuff Lingitz. The store denied Lingitz’s claim that he was kicked or slammed to the ground.
According to documents filed in U.S. District Court, Lingitz, of Gem Lake, agreed to drop his claim that his civil rights were violated, that excessive force was used and that he was denied medical care while he was held in Ramsey County Jail.
Defendants in the lawsuit included Ramsey County, a store security guard, the store’s security firm and Cub Foods’ parent company.
Under terms of the agreement, none of the damages Lingitz sought were awarded. Ramsey County paid attorney fees of $3,000. The agreement also prohibits the parties from discussing the case publicly.
Wisconsin
Court overturns man’s homicide 2011 conviction
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A state appeals court has ordered a new trial for a Milwaukee homicide suspect.
A jury convicted Brandon Burnside in 2011 of shooting Bryan Drake. Burnside argued statements he made during an interview with police should have been suppressed during his trial. He said he agreed to a voluntary interview but he was really in custody and no one read him his rights.
The 1st District Court of Appeals agreed on Tuesday, saying nothing shows Burnside was free to leave during the interview. The court overturned his conviction and sent the case back to Milwaukee County Circuit Court for a new trial.
A spokeswoman for the state Justice Department says attorneys will consider asking the state Supreme Court to take the case. Burnside’s attorney didn’t immediately return a message.
Illinois
Quinn has until June 6 to reply to court motion
CHICAGO (AP) — A federal judge says Gov. Pat Quinn has until June 6 to respond to a request for an investigation into hiring practices under the Democrat’s administration.
Judge Sidney Schenkier set that deadline at a hearing in Chicago Tuesday regarding an ongoing civil lawsuit.
Last week, attorney Michael Shakman filed the motion requesting the investigation. Shakman spearheaded a decades-long court case leading to bans on political hiring.
Shakman’s filing cites a Better Government Association report that Illinois’ Department of Transportation skirted rules against political hiring in filling hundreds of positions.
In the wake of Shakman’s motion, Quinn’s office has said it has “zero tolerance” for violations of hiring procedures.
Judge Schenkier on Tuesday scheduled the next status hearing on the issue for June 17.
Connecticut
Ex-NFLer Hugh Douglas sued by his ex-girlfriend
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Former NFL defensive end Hugh Douglas is being sued by his ex-girlfriend in Connecticut for allegedly assaulting her multiple times, including at Hartford hotel last year that resulted in his arrest but no jail time.
Thirty-three-year-old Hope Davila of Hartford and her attorney, Gloria Allred, filed the federal lawsuit Monday. Davila believes she didn’t get justice with the criminal case and is seeking damages for alleged physical and emotional harm.
Messages were left for Douglas and his attorney Tuesday.
Douglas, of Bryn Mawr, Pa., played for the New York Jets, Philadelphia Eagles and Jacksonville Jaguars from 1995 to 2004. He was sentenced in Hartford state court in February to two years in a probation-like program, after pleading no contest to breach of peace in the hotel incident.
Louisiana
Judge says no to $21M Coushatta tribe settlement
LAKE CHARLES, La. (AP) — State District Judge Clayton Davis has refused to enforce a $21 million settlement between a construction firm and the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana.
In 2006, Meyer and Associates filed a lawsuit alleging the tribe had breached a contract for various professional services which both sides entered into in 2001.
According to the Tribal Council, Chairman Lovelin Poncho settled with Meyer and Associates without the consent of the other members of the four-person council.
Meyer claims that the chairman has the authority to settle on behalf of the council. Thus, the settlement should be enforced. However, the Tribal Council disagrees. The council said the chairman was sent to meet with Meyer and attorneys for “talks” but never to come up with an agreement on their behalf.
The court heard testimony from various tribe members and the chairman Monday morning during the two-hour hearing.
“This hasn’t been done the right way,” Davis said. “I’m not going to approve a settlement that the council is not going to ratify or agree to.”
The American Press reports Meyer plans to appeal the ruling.
In January 2003, the Tribal Council passed a resolution, giving the chairman authority to enter all necessary agreements to develop an electric power generating station, which would generate long-term revenue for the tribe.
Meyer claims the resolution addressed the authority of the chairman or his designee to waive sovereign immunity on agreements.
However, during testimony Poncho stated that he often gets approval by the Tribal Council for “political reasons.” Other tribal members said in their testimony that they would not allow the chairman to agree to a settlement of that magnitude. The current chairman Poncho even submitted an affidavit in support of Meyer.
In the petition for breach of contract, Meyer claimed the firm sustained “enormous economic and commercial damage” including loss of profit, libel damages and damage to reputation.
According to the suit, Meyer “invested vast sums of money and resources, with excellent progress being made in furtherance of the Power Project.”
The purpose of the hearing was to decide whether the settlement was valid — not whether a settlement is warranted.
