Roll Call Exclusive: Taxpayers paid $220K to settle case involving Rep. Alcee Hastings https://shar.es/1MeO4q by @stephanieakin
-
Show this thread
-
So, before I shut down for the night, back to the settlement "involving" Rep. Alcee Hastings.
2 replies 8 retweets 9 likesShow this thread -
The case against the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe was voluntarily dismissed in 2014 (presumably that's when the settlement was reached) — but after Rep. Hastings had been dismissed from the case.pic.twitter.com/tT7XPvtSnA
2 replies 8 retweets 3 likesShow this thread -
Here was the initial complaint filed in 2011, filed after going through counseling and mediation at OOC, with backing from Judicial Watch. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4325299-Packer-Complaint.html …pic.twitter.com/TOr4FgWgHG
1 reply 9 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
Here are some of the allegations made against Hastings in the complaint, which also alleges that several staff — of several different offices — were informed:pic.twitter.com/fcQsk2YOmJ
2 replies 8 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
Hastings hired his own outside counsel for the case, Wilmer Cutler — Big Law — which argued (among other things) that, even if the facts were as the accuser presented them, it would not constitute a hostile work environment. Read: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4325302-Packer-Hastings-MtD.html …pic.twitter.com/mnyXlsQxFG
2 replies 8 retweets 4 likesShow this thread -
The case against Hastings and a staffer was dismissed because, the court ruled, the CAA was the sole route for relief, and the claim at the district court was seeking relief outside the CAA. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4325303-Packer-Dismissal.html …pic.twitter.com/D7gABlkIHh
1 reply 6 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
In other words, the judge did not get to the merits of the claim on that front. The case continued, though, against the commission. Judicial Watch and another lawyer stopped representing the plaintiff, who continued pro se (without a lawyer).
1 reply 7 retweets 3 likesShow this thread -
At one point, the CSCE answered the complaint: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4325301-Packer-CSCE-Answer.html … ... The CSCE was represented by House Employment Counsel.pic.twitter.com/puxWq25oWy
1 reply 3 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
After a lot of back-and-forth, the plaintiff and CSCE agreed to dismiss the case with prejudice (meaning, it can't be refiled) in 2014. The dismissal was signed by an attorney with House Employment Counsel. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4325300-Packer-Settlement.html …pic.twitter.com/EOupCXQaWb
1 reply 4 retweets 4 likesShow this thread
In light of that, I'm not sure what Hastings meant when he told Roll Call: "This matter was handled solely by the Senate Chief Counsel for Employment." It was not.pic.twitter.com/VIw80K5AlB
-
-
In FY2014, the OOC acknowledged that there were 11 settlements and awards $806,450 paid out of its fund. It makes sense to me that this settlement would not have shown up in the House numbers released earlier. Roll Call reports this came out of the larger OOC numbers.pic.twitter.com/PAhP9teYZ1
0 replies 8 retweets 10 likesShow this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.