Laserfiche WebLink
<br />" r, <br />dl> <br /> <br />TUESDAY JUNE 6, 1972 <br /> <br />therefore, authorization rests with the Council. Vice-Mayor West then offered <br /> <br />the following motion, viz., that the City of Martinsville engage a local law firm <br /> <br />to represent the City in the pending case (i.e., Fralin & Waldron, Inc., vs. <br /> <br />City of Martinsville) and leave question open as to whether to engage an outside <br /> <br />law firm as auxiliary assistance in concert with the City Attorney and the <br /> <br />local law firm. Subsequent discussion of this motion, as seconded by Councilman <br /> <br />........-- <br /> <br />Boaz, indicated the intent that City Attorney Cubine be authorized to engage the <br /> <br />legal services of a local law firm to assist him in defending the City and, <br /> <br />between him and such local law firm, determine whether to engage the additional <br /> <br />legal assistance of an "outside" (Le., non-local) law firm. City Attorney Cubine <br /> <br />maintained that if Council appoints such assistance or associates, it will be <br /> <br />contrary to Charter provisions. The City Attorney also referred to the prior <br /> <br />Federal Court case involving the City, wherein he selected a local associate <br /> <br />counsel and City Council concurred, with his actions in both the prior case <br /> <br />and the pending case being in accordance with his best judgment in the interest <br /> <br />of the City. Vice-Mayor West stated that his contact - with Senator Stone was <br /> <br />with no thought of "going over the City Attorney's head" but with the <br /> <br />conviction that Council should express itself in this matter and with the <br /> <br />over-riding point that a local law firm should be selected. In reply to <br /> <br />City Attorney Cubine's expression that this course of events "seems to be <br /> <br />an effort on part of Mr. West to force me to resign" (as City Attorney) <br /> <br />and "I do not intend reSigning",~~iCe-MaYOr stated that he has no such purpose <br /> <br />but did refer to his letter to Mr. Cubine which implied Mr. Cubine's unwillingness <br /> <br />to work in concert with a local law firm. Meanwhile, the City Attorney informed <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />Council that a requested extension for a reply to the filed suit has been <br /> <br />granted, i.e., to July 1, 1972, and that answers to the suit are in process of <br /> <br />being prepared by and with the Danville law firm he has engaged. <br />