Enfield Lawsuit Settlement Amounts Released

ENFIELD, CT — Pursuant to an order from the Freedom of Information Commission (FOIC), the town of Enfield has released the 10 settlement amounts, totaling $792,500, paid out in lawsuits against the town and/or police department over the past two years.

Town Attorney Chris Bromson released the figures Friday morning. They are:

• Mark Maher (Docket No. 3:15cv00414 WWE) $250,000
• Eric Avalos (Docket No. 3:15cv00902 VAB) $ 90,000
• Frank Salas (Docket No. 3:14cv01883 WWE) $ 60,000
• Ronnie Salas (Docket No. 3:14cv01895 WWE) $ 25,000
• Zachary Trowbridge (Docket No. 3:15cv00688JAM) $ 27,500
• Barbara Crowley (Docket No. 3:14cv01903 MPS) $125,000
• Christopher McDaniel (Docket No. 3:15cv01710 JAM) $ 25,000
• Christopher Demski (Docket No. 3:14cv001568 VAB) $ 25,000
• David McAlmond (Docket No. 3:15cv00158 JAM) $ 25,000
• Amie Olschafskie (Docket No. 3:15cv00067 MPS) $140,000

In each claim, Enfield taxpayers are responsible for paying a $25,000 deductible, totaling $250,000. The town's insurance carrier, the Connecticut Interlocal Risk Management Association (CIRMA), paid the balance of each settlement together with all attorney’s fees and litigation costs, Bromson said.

The American Civil Liberties Union and a local newspaper made requests pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) for settlement amounts and related documents. Attorney James Tallberg, retained by CIRMA to represent the town, advised withholding release of the settlement documents or amounts until all of the cases were resolved, Bromson said.

Both the ACLU and the newspaper filed complaints with the FOIC. On Dec. 18, 2017, the Town Council consented to the settlement of the last of these cases, Bromson said.

Prior to the filing of these lawsuits, except in the Maher case, no complaints were ever received by the Enfield Police Department or the town in the above-referenced matters, according to Bromson.

Pursuant to the General Orders of the Police Department, an internal affairs investigation was conducted in each of the complaints. In the Maher case, discipline was imposed, while in each of the other complaints, all allegations were found to be unsubstantiated, Bromson said.

There was no admission of liability by the town in any of these settlements. The Town Council had serious reservations in consenting to these awards. However, as explained in CIRMA’s so-called “hammer clause letter” dated Dec. 13, 2017, the town was left with no meaningful choice but to consent to these settlements. “Hammer clause” means if the town does not settle for the amount recommended by CIRMA, CIRMA would withdraw the attorneys it hired for the town and the town would have to retain new attorneys at its own expense. If, after a trial, an amount was awarded that exceeded what CIRMA had been willing to pay, the town would be responsible for that amount, plus plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees and other litigation costs, Bromson said.

The Town Council made an economic decision to settle the cases in order to limit the town’s liability and to avoid potential catastrophic financial loss, the town attorney added.

Photo credit: Town of Enfield