Laserfiche WebLink
JOINT DEFENSE AGREEMENT <br />Recitals <br />1. The City of ("City") has been named as a <br />defendant in two actions filed in the Fourth Judicial District, File Nos. 93-00218 and <br />00219, entitled John Starks v. Minnesota Police Recruitment System, et al. and <br />Christopher Fields v. Minnesota Police Recruitment System, et al. ("Lawsuits”). <br />The plaintiffs in the Lawsuits allege that the defendants have cdlegedly engaged in <br />activities that result in a rc-cial discriminatory impact on the plaintiffs. The <br />complaints name as defendants 36 cities and the Minnesota Police Recruitment <br />System. <br />2. The City has been advised by the firm of Holmes & Graven Ir a letter <br />dated January 27, 1993 of the ramifications, including the advantages and risks, <br />involved in having a single law firm jointly represent all of the defendants in the <br />Lawsuits. The City has also been advised by Holmes & Graven that it should consult <br />with independent counsel as to whether it should agree to be jointly represented by <br />one attorney in the case. <br />3. The City believes that it is in its best interests to retain Holmes St <br />Graven to defend the City in the case and to have Holmes & Graven jointly represent <br />the other defendants^ in ttoe Lawsuits. <br />Agreement <br />Based on the above recitals, the City agrees as follows: <br />1. The City retains the firm of Holmes & Graven to represent it in the <br />Lawsuits and consents to having Holmes & Graven represent the other defendants <br />in the Lawsuits. The City understands that Holmes & Gi'»ven wiU bill MPRS and that <br />the allocation of defense costs will be decided by the MPRS Board. <br />JJT477M <br />muo-i