Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />1 <br />1 <br />COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 11, 1993 <br />that the inaction of the City to get the neighboring septic <br />system repaired is responsible for his physical problems. Mr. <br />Boop is asking for a monetary award. The matter has been turned <br />over to the insurance company and they have appointed Mr. George <br />Hoff to represent the City. The matter went before the District <br />Court and the summary judgement motion for the City was denied. <br />The matter will go to trial. <br />Mr. Hawkins explained that there is new legislation that may <br />provide immunity protection to the City and avoid a trial on the <br />matter. However, at this point all staff involved in this matter <br />have exercised due care. <br />Since Mr. Boop is claiming that the City is negligent because it <br />did not act in a more expeditious manner, the outcome of the case <br />could affect how all other Minnesota municipalities handle their <br />litigation cases. An appeal was authorized by the insurance <br />carrier and the Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court <br />decision because this issue has never been ruled on before. An <br />appeal to the State Supreme Court was declined. The matter was <br />returned to the District Court for trial. <br />Mr. Boop felt that Mr. Hoff's firm was too aggressive in this <br />matter and filed a complaint against Mr. Hoff with the <br />Professional Board. The Professional Board dismissed the <br />complaint and stated that Mr. Hoff was acting factually and no <br />errors were committed. <br />Mr. Hawkins explained that Council Members may get telephone <br />calls from Mr. Boop or other persons representing Mr. Boop <br />because he does not want to go to trial. A letter has been <br />written by the legislator in the area where Mr. Boop is now <br />residing. Mr. Hoff has responded to this letter. <br />Mayor Reinert explained that the State sets the regulations for <br />septic system installations and also noted that there are a great <br />many faulty septic systems throughout Minnesota. Mr. Hawkins <br />said the concern is the City has ordinances and what obligation <br />does the City have to enforce the ordinances and if the <br />ordinances are not enforced in a timely manner, is the City <br />liable. Another questions is whether or not the City is liable <br />for acts that are committed by a third party. In this case the <br />City did correct the faulty septic system. However does the City <br />want to finance correcting all failed systems? If the City does <br />correct a failed system, is the City then responsible for the <br />septic system? <br />Mr. Hawkins told the City Council that they may be receiving <br />communication from persons other than City staff on this matter. <br />PAGE 14 <br />