He [Mayor Boughton] added that the city's legal fees alone probably reached nearly $1 million, while court documents indicate the plaintiffs' attorneys racked up more than $5.9 million in costs.
Boughton said in his deposition that the suit had cost Danbury about $500,000 with the town responsible for a $100,000 deductible.
At this point, given Boughton's inconsistent comments (AGAIN), maybe someone should file an Freedom of Information request with the city and get the real figure on the city attorney fees.
In light of Boughton's inconsistent statements to the public, and the 400,000 dollar settlement in this case, THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO VIEW THE DEPOSITION FROM BOUGHTON, McLACHLAN and CHIEF BAKER...make the depositions available to the public.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
