Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem #39 - Discussion ItemM CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM 51 TO. Honorable Mayor and Members DATE: July 24, 1988 FILE: of the City Commission SUBJECT: Status Report on the Disposition of Cases in City Attorney's Office - June, 1985 - June, 1986 FROM: Lucia A. Dougherty REFERENCES: City Attorney ENCLOSURES: In order to keep you fully advised as to the disposition of all lawsuits filed against the City, this office has prepared the attached list of case summaries. This list comprises the oases that have been concluded by trial or by judicial disposition as opposed to settlement. We have not listed the oases that have been settled, since you have been advised in all such oases in which an offer is made of $4,500.00. It is noteworthy that since October 1988 the City has closed 628 claims with an average payout for such claims under $100,000 of $4,264 there were only S oases over $100,000. It should be also noted that the City prevailed in each of the following oases in that the jury award or disposition never exceeded the amount offered by the City or never approached the demand requested by the plaintiff. 1. Fernando Arguelles and Lillian Arguelles v. City of Miami, Circuit Court Case No. 84-18873 (20) (JLP): Plaintiff, Fernando Arguelles was seen by City of Miami police officer driving erratically and was arrested for DUI. Plaintiff's wife was arrested for disturbing the peace. Case went to trial in June, 1986 on false arrest, imprisonment and assault and battery and jury awarded nothing to the Plaintiff himself, however, awarded his wife i10,000.00. 2. Andrew Arridoni. et al. v. City of Miami and Alan D. Savit2, Circuit Court Case No. 88-47281 (JJC). This case was a suit to enjoin the condemnation and demolition of property located at 28 Northwest 19th Court and 1901 Northwest Miami Court for building code violations. The Plaintiffs subsequently took a voluntary dismissal. IS C ll S.S / 6 Al Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission July 24, 1988 Page 2 3. Humberto Bad& and Isabel Bada. his wife v. The City of Miami_ a mUnioipality: P. Saavedra and J.L. Garcia. U.S. District Court Case 88-2472-Civ-K8H08, L-88-77 (Police), reo'd. June 8, 1985, D/I: February 28, 1985, L/I: Plaintiffs' Residence (MJC). Plaintiffs alleged violations of their civil rights, negligence, false arrest, malicious prosecution, negligent training retention and supervision. Humberto Bada claims permanent injury and Isabel Bada claims loss of consortium of her husband. Humberto spent five hours in jail. Demand was $80,000. The case was tried on March 28, 1986 and a jury verdiot was rendered for defendants Pending motion for new trial. 4. Yernon Binns V. City of Miami, Circuit Court Case No. 88- 17749 (06) (JLF). This Motor vehicle accident involved a solid waste truck which operated a remote control crane on top of the truck. The driver did not see plaintiff's oar and, as a result, hit it on the front left side of the oar, pushing it approximately 80 feet. At the time of the accident, Plaintiff did not claim any injuries and one week after the accident, plaintiff signed a release of all claims. A few days later, he went to the dootor and discovered that he had been injured in the accident. After completing discovery, a Motion for Summary Judgment was filed on the grounds that Plaintiff is estopped from claiming against the City because he had knowingly, willfully and without duress entered into a contract releasing the City from any and all liability arising from this accident. The court granted the City's Motion for Summary Judgment on May 1, 1988. S. Richard Book v. City of Miami, Case No. 090-24-6,123 (RSR). This, was a claim for medical expenses and costs as well as temporary total disability ("TMO) benefits. The claim was denied in its entirety because it did not arise out of and in the course of this policeman's employment because he was off duty when assaulted. 6. WiLril n and Edward Branch v. City of Miami, Case NO. 84- 41711 CA-24 (RLD). This case involved police offioers who were in hot pursuit of a fleeing felon who violently escaped from custody and a M Honorable Mayor and Members July 24, 1986 of the City Commission Page 3 perimeter was set up in plaintiff's neighborhood. A K-9 unit was called to oonduot a sweep of the area and when our K-9 officer arrived at plaintiffs, seemingly abandoned dwelling, the police dog alerted to the interior of the home. The police knocked at the door and with no response, the dog was turned loose and it went under the house and up through a loose floor board into the house and out of the sight and control of the K-9 officer. At that point the K-9 officer had a reasonable belief that the fleeing felon might be hiding in the house, that the house might be ocoupied by an unattended child, and fearing that the dog could do injury to an innooent individual, felt the necessity to break through the door and determine whether the house was occupied and also retrieve and secure the dog. The interior of the home was found to be in total disarray and unoocupied and the dog was safely retrieved by the polioe officer. Shortly afterwards, Mr. V M:os. Branch arrived at the premises, told police that they lived there with their children and oomplained of the damage to the door and additionally claimed that $1,800 in cash, jewelry and other valuable items were missing. Plaintiffs also alleged that their house had been ransacked by the police. Mr. V Mrs. Branch sued the City for trespass, negligence, intentional infliotion of emotional distress, and breaoh of contract for not repairing the door, alleging that the City had promised to do so. Evidence was produced of subsequent burglaries to the dwelling prior to the repairs to the door. Plaintiffs demanded $25,000, and the case went to jury trial in Deoember, 1988. The jury returned a verdict of $3,000 in favor of plaintiffs. 7. Rrickei? Place Phase TT v. American Design. et al., Circuit Court Case No. 82-8083 (CA-06) (JJC). The City was sued on the basis of its inspection duties of a high rise oondominum under the South Florida Building Code. Also, the City was a cross defendant in a lawsuit filed by a oo-defendant seeking an interpretation of the South Florida Building Code. The City defended the oases on the basis of the Trianon decision and prevailed in a rehearing on a motion to dismiss the main claim. Additionally, the City prevailed on a motion to dismiss the orossolaim brought against the City for interpretation. �Y ii{ll /1 1} 5 f 1 it I: j I Honorable Mayor and Members July 24, 1986 of the City Commission Page 4 r :.i L2 10. Mikele_ Carter v. City, U.S. District Court Case No. 84-1718 (LMF). Former Assistant City Attorney Mikele Carter sued the City of Miami for alleged age, sex and religious discrimination. The case was tried in February, 1986 and the Judge found for the Defendant, City of Miami on the issues of sex and religious discrimination. At the present time various post -trial motions filed by the parties are being considered by the Court, which is also considering the issues of damages, which could amount to approximately $300,000.00 if the Court finds for the Plaintiff on all issues regarding damages. Centrust Savings Bank- etc v. City of Miami. Gould. et a1., Circuit Court Case No. 88-28928 (JJC). Centrust sued the City of Miami and other City of Miami property owners, i.e. Theodore B. Gould; Olympic & York Florida Equity Corps, d/b/a Miami Center Joint Venture and Miami Center Corporation, d/b/a Chopin Associates. The complaint sought a writ of mandamus compelling the City to enforce the South Florida Building Code against the Defendant property owners as to their buildings located in the City of Miami. The trial court held that the complaint did not state a prima facie case for mandamus. On Appeal, the Third District Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal in the favor of the City. City of Miami v. Fraternal Order, of Police. Lodge No. 20. Class Action Grievance No. 14-85 (AQJ). This was a grievance arbitration proceeding taken on behalf of all members of the FOP bargaining unit comprised of the City's police officers, sergeants, lieutenants and captains. The issue involved was whether the City violated certain provisions of the collective bargaining agreement by discontinuing the practice of having officers' vehicles fueled by fuel attendants and requiring that the officers fuel their own vehicles. The arbitrator held that the City of Miami was within its management authority to determine and alter its •methods of operation and modification of job assignments in conducting its business. Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission July 24, 1986 Page s 11. City of Miami V. RnTnhartn Loj?ez (AQJ and GC). Humberto Lopez was dismissed on December 13. 1982 from his position as a Building Inspector I in the Department of Fire, Rescue and Inspection Services for breach of duty and conduct unbecoming an employee of the City of Miami. The City of Miami Civil Service Board upheld the dismissal and it was affirmed by the City Manager. Humberto Lopez appealed to the appellate division of the Circuit Court of the 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Dade County, Florida which reversed the judgment of the City Manager and Civil Service Board and ordered that the employee be reinstated. The City of Miami filed a Writ of Certiorari with the Third District court of Appeal to review the decision of the Circuit Court. The Third District Court of Appeal granted certiorari, quashing the opinion of the Circuit Court, and remanded the case to the Civil Service Board to make findings of fact. 12. Michael Cosgrove v. Citg of Miami, U.S. District Court Case No. 84-188445, Circuit Court Case No. 84-28468, U.S. Court of Appeals Case No. 84-6900. (LMF). ' This case was handled by outside counsel, Morgan, Lewis Bookius (peter Hurtgen). The case was tried before Judge s Barad and the jury returned a verdict for approximately k k`; $140,000.00, $17,500.00 of which was overturned by the Judge based upon post -trial motions. The remaining issues are on appeal at the present time. 13. Nanay Fairhurst v. City of Miami, Circuit Court Case No. 88- 18027. (ABS). Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking back pay claiming that the City wrongfully failed to oonsider her prior experience as an identification technician in determining the amount of her salary as a beginning police officer. The City filed a motion for summary judgment in which it was argued that Plaintiff failed to state a cause of action, failed to exhaust an efficacious administrative remedy before resorting to the court, and failed to file her lawsuit within the statutory limitations period governing such actions. The City's motion was granted and the case was dismissed. I Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission July 24, 1986 Page 6 14. Mary Fi el de v City of Miami State of Florida. neFartmen_t of Trangporta.tinn and One Biscayne Tower, Circuit Court Case No. 88-8191 (28) (JLF). Plaintiff tripped and fell on a tree planter in front of One Biscayne Tower Building. The City filed a Motion for Summary Judgment and a Memorandum of Law in Support thereof arguing that One Biscayne Tower was responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of their sidewalk according to Section 84-43 of the Miami Code and therefore the City was entitled to a summary judgment. The City was voluntarily dismissed from this case on January, 1986. However, the City paid Plaintiff $1,500.00 on May, 1988 with an agreement that an appeal of the issue would not be filed. 18. ar aternp1 nrAA . of Pollee etc v Sergio Pereira and City of Miami, Case No. 88-41025 (ABS). The Fraternal Order of Police filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus seeking the invalidation of a Police Lieutenant civil service examination in which an assessment center had been used for the first time in the history of the City of Miami. Based on the City's response and oral argument, the Petition for Writ of Mandamus was denied. 18. Fugal v. City of Miami, Case No. 88-42687 (CA-11) (PIA). Edna, Arthur, and Rita Frogel and Edward and Ruth Mansdorf filed suit in Circuit Court against the City seeking an injunction prohibiting the City.of Miami from demolishing an unsafe structure. The injunction was granted directing the City to complete certain procedural steps. The City complied with these steps and the City was successful in obtaining an Order Dissolving the injunotion and dismissing the case. The City is continuing its course of action to have the structure demolished. 17. Harry Garcon v. City of Miami, Case No. 88-13810 (RLD). Plaintiff came in contact with an electrically charged light pole owned and maintained by the City of Miami causing a severe electrical shook. Plaintiff was oomatose for approximately one hour after the incident, hospitalized, and allegedly suffered a significant neurological permanent injury. The claim was dismissed with prejudice due to a technicality on a motion by the City and the claim is extinguished with the City not paying any damages. rrt� Y Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission July 24, 1986 Page 7 18. ,toe Green v. C ty of Miami, Case No. 419-28-4375 (RSR). The City was the claimant (a.g. plaintiff) in this claim where Mr. Green had been receiving permanent total disability ("PTD") benefits from the city for over a decade. The City proved that Mr. Green was gainfully re-employed and was no longer "PTD". Petition for Modification brought by _= the city was granted on April 30, 1986. 19. ClArA 9 wAnUAI TgIanias V. City of Miaml, Circuit Court Case No. 85-13494 (14) (JLF). A solid waste truck rearended the Plaintiff's oar. The case went to trial solely on the issue of damages, the City having admitted liability. The Plaintiff asked the jury for $100.000.00. and the jury awarded the Plaintiff $25,000.00 on February 11, 1986. =' 20. Robert J. Jaoober etc v Better Construction and City, ' Circuit Court Case No. 84-38501 (CA-07) (JJC). This is a case concerning a complaint for damages incurred "a as a result of a construction project in Jose Marti Park. The case was dismissed with prejudice by the Plaintiff after the City filed a Notion to Dismiss. 21. Logan v. City of Miami. at al . , Circuit Court Case No. 85- `: 42111 (LMF). The case involved a Sao. 1983 claim for false arrest based upon a charge of receiving stolen property, which was nolle prossed in the Criminal Court. The case was removed to the Distriot Court and Judge Scott, based upon a Motion to Dismiss filed by the City and the police officer, dismissed the case without prejudice, allowing the Plaintiff to amend within a certain time. Plaintiff, however, chose not to amend and the case is now being considered closed based upon the Court's dismissal of the Complaint. 22. Harvey MQArthUZ et al. v. Firestone at al. and Matty Hira , U.S. Court Case No. 85-43107 (CA-14) (JJC). The Plaintiffs are the 1985 Socialist Workers' Party candidate for Mayor of Miami, his campaign manager and Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission 23. 24. July 24, 1986 Page 8 others who are seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against several individuals including the City Clerk, Natty Hirai, to protest the disclosures required under Florida Statutes of those who contributed to the campaign and those to whom campaign disbursement were made. The court denied plaintiffs' motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and subsequently dismissed the action filed by the Plaintiffs. The case has been appealed to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals by the Plaintiffs and the appeal is pending. This lawsuit was filed by the media to gain access to oertain records. The City claimed an exemption from the public records law as active criminal investigative information. After presenting evidence to the Court. Judge Stone agreed with the City's position and denied access sought by writ. i• MN V1 . • • MR I 1 4E 4 W.M.• On December 19. 1981, Peter J. Nunez was involved in a traffio accident whereby the automobile he was driving oollided with a tree in the median strip of Coral Way. Mr. Nunez alleged that he was negligently examined and treated by Miami Fire Paramedics and negligently transported to Jackson Memorial Hospital by a Miami police officer. Mr. Nunez further alleged negligent medical treatment by Metro Dade County employees at Jackson Memorial Hospital. Mr. Nunez claimed the City's actions caused him pain, suffering and disability, both permanent and continuing in nature, cost of medical care, and lost income. Mr. Nunez refused to make a monetary claim to the City and demanded a trial by jury. The City's Motion for Directed Verdict was made at the conclusion of Plaintiff's case and was granted by the Court. Subsequently. the City has been awarded $299.94 for costs incurred during trial preparation. such amount to be paid by Mr. Nunez. ry x A 3 +Y •: Honorable Mayor and Members July 24, 1986 r of the City Commission Page 9 28. Old Renublio Insurance Co (Third Party Plaintiff) v. City of Miaml (Third Party Defendant). (Volpe Lawsuit.) Circuit Court Case No. 82-9948 (CA-30) (JJC). This case involved complex, multi -party oonstruotion litigation whioh was eventually tried in a month long jury trial. The City had been brought into the lawsuit in a third party aotion on the basis of alleged negligent =. building inspections. Prior to trial, the City filed a pre- trial motion with memorandum of law on the basis of the Florida Supreme Court oase of Trianon. Third Party plaintiff then agreed to the entry of a dismissal as to the City before the trial commenced. 26. Antoinette Oliveri v. City of Miami, Circuit Court Case No. 'a.. 84-38428 (10) (JLP). ' Plaintiff slipped and fell sustaining a fracture to her left ' hip while attending the Flea Market in the baseball stadium �} sponsored by Alberto Lopez. Insurance oompany insuring the ^s-T Flea Market had denied coverage for this aooident. After discovery, the City was able to show that the aooident occurred within the premises and that oonsequently, the insurance company was responsible for this aooident. ,i ' Eventually, the insurance company notified the City that it 3 was taking over the defense of this oase and assuming responsibility for paying judgment, if any. 27. nrlsmdn Paredes v. City of Miami, Case No. 26$-15-6363 (RSR). A Permanent Total Disability olaimant sued the City for damages to his teeth allegedly occurring during surgery for a oompensable hip injury. The olaimant said his teeth were damaged during the surgery by city's anesthesiologist. The claim was denied on May 6, 1986 when the Deputy Commissioner found no causal oonneotion between the teeth damage and the compensable hip injury. 28. Mario Perez v. City of Miami, Circuit Court Case No. 78- 37766 (LMF). This oase involving a oonstruotion aooident occurring in the construction of the police department was handled by insurance counsel, Richard Dunn. Plaintiff fell from a scaffolding sustaining serious and permanent injuries. A r �> O Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission July 24, 1986 Page 10 verdict of 3.2 million was returned after a second trial of the matter. The case is now on appeal on various issues including insurance coverages and liability. 29. Don Reilly v. City of Miami, Case No. 83-14821 (ABS). Plaintiff sought damages compensating him for losses suffered a as a result of the City's failure to promote him to the rank of Fire Captain in 1979. He claimed that the City's actions in 1979 deprived him of the opportunity to be promoted to Fire Chief in 1982. The City filed a motion for summary judgment arguing, among other things, that the Court oould not award damages based on Plaintiff's claim because such damages would be based on speculation and conjecture. The City's motion was granted and the case was dismissed. 30. Rodill v. City of Miami, Case No. 88-18430 CA-10 (RLD). Plaintiff, Wilfredo Rodill, sued the City of Miami for the negligent maintenance of tree branches which covered a stop sign located within the City. Plaintiff claims that as a result of the covered stop sign he went through the intersection and collided with another vehicle, thereby suffering serious orthopedic injuries. City of Miami had testimony from the investigating police officer at the scene of the accident that the sign was not obscured by any tree limbs and cited the Plaintiff for running a stop sign. Plaintiff's attorney demanded $100,000. The case was tried to a jury in February, 1986 with the result of a verdict of total damages in the amount of $268,000, reduced by 93% comparative negligence attributable to the Plaintiff, resulting in a net award of $18,760.00. 31. Terry Russell v. City of Miami, Case No. 264-21-3609 (RSR). Claim for medical and temporary disability benefits dismissed for failure to prosecute. 32. Rstate of Emanuel Salinardi v. Citg of Miami, Case NO. 073- 34-8653 (RSR). This was a case for death benefits under the act for the heirs of the deceased workers. The case was dismissed with prejudice on the basis of the statute of limitations on April 16, 1986. -' I xX•;r'' 1 �yY Honorable Mayor and Members July 24, 1986 . of the City Commission Page 11 ',F 1 - f F. r 33. Otis W Shiver v. Matty Hirai, etc— et al. , Circuit Court -: Case No. 88-43107 (CA-14) (JJC). A candidate for Mayor sued the City Clerk to have his name placed on the ballot. The Court ruled that the Plaintiff would have to pay reprinting costs of the ballots to have "= ? his name placed on the ballot as a mayoral candidate. t 34. nnUglas Shuman v. City of Miami, Case No. 83-2428-Civ. Plaintiff, Douglas Shuman, was at Peacock Park early in the morning of March 12, 1982, carrying a .38 caliber weapon which he had discharged in the park. The gunshot was heard by a City of Miami police officer on patrol. The officer responded and as he approached Mr. Shuman, the officer was told to back off and that Mr. Shuman was going to commit suicide. Back up units were summoned, as well as fire rescue, and a perimeter was set up surrounding the subject. .. Captain Rodney Sayre, who took charge of the crisis, attempted several techniques in attempting to get Mr. Shuman to drop the gun and surrender. Capt . 'Sayre instructed one of City of Miami sharpshooters to prepare to shoot the subject should be attempt to flee and to use a shotgun and j aim low with the objective of trying at least to save the young man' s life if shooting was necessary. After one and one half hours of negotiations, the subject. all of a sudden, made a rapid movement toward the northeast edge of the perimeter where two undercover police officers were hiding with their weapons drawn and Shuman about to encounter them. Capt. Sayre ordered the sharpshooter to fire, which he did immediately, and Mr. Shuman was struck in the upper thigh area and lower abdomen, immediately falling -= to the ground. Mr. Shuman spent two months in the hospital and another four months recuperating from serious internal injuries with disputed medical evidence as to any permanent disability. Plaintiff. made a claim against the City for violation of civil rights under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and various counts of negligenoe on the part of Miami police offioere. The case was tried in Federal District Court late in 1988 After hearing all of the evidence presented by Plaintiff, the Judge granted a directed verdict on all counts in favor of j T 1 ., Honorable Mayor and Members July 24, 1988 ' of the City Commission Page 12 i ity i all of the defendants, City of Miami, Kenneth Harms, Howard e Gary, Rodney Sayre, and Andy Watson. I 35. s7ames P. Sigman v. City of Miami, Case No. 88-7883 (ABS). Sigman sought damages for mental pain and suffering and punitive damages based on the City's failure to promote him to Sergeant of Police in 1980. The requested relief was denied when the City's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings . was granted . 38. pat Skublah v. Florida Power and Light Company and City of Miami. etc., Circuit Court Case No. 86-08343 (CA-17) (JJC). s Skubish filed suit against the City and FP&L seeking to have pertain electrical lines placed underground claiming a violation of the -City Charter. The City Piled a motion to dismiss on several grounds. Subsequently, a voluntary dismissal was taken by the Plaintiff. 37. Specialty Restaurants v. City et al., Circuit Court No. 84- }" �t 42684 (CA-18) (JJC). f Specialty Restaurants sued the City and the operators of r? Horatio's alleging that the City improperly allowed alcoholic beverages to be sold by Horatio's without allowing t for competitive bidding. Horatio's filed a counterclaim against Specialty Restaurants and across -claim against the City when the Rusty Pelican Restaurant burned down and construction to rebuild and operate the restaurant was — allowed without competitive bidding. The City filed a Notion for Summary Judgment as to the main claim and a -- Notion to Dismiss the dross-olaim, both were granted in the City's favor by Judge Rivkind. The oases are currently on appeal. -_ 38. Ronald C. St vans, Charles D. Cart6r. and Stephen Vinson v. QIty of Miami and Robert D. Krause, Case No. 86-14616 (ABS). Plaintiffs sought damages in the form of back pay based on the City's alleged violation of 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983, Chapter 295 of the Florida Statutes, and the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The requested relief was denied when the City's Notion for Summary Judgment was granted. r f'NI W Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission July 24, 1986 Page 13 i i j 39. Guy m„ttia and Janet Tuttle his mother V. Miami nolph nsLtd. Joseph Robbie, South Florida Sports Corp.. and City of Miami, Circuit Court Case 82-14093 12), L-82-104 (Stadiums), reo'd. July 28, 1982, D/I: November 20, 1980, L/I: Orange Bowl (MJC). s A Minor apparently fell over broken guard rail at Orange Bowl. The Beer vendor joined as defendant. Medical bills were $28,000.00. The Case was tried on March 3-7, 1988, and a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiffs was reversed by order for new trial signed April 22, 1986. Plaintiffs are appealing order for new trial. 40. Dan Van Tran, at al. v.,Miami Ca.bleyision_ etc. and City of Miami. etc., Circuit Court Case No. 88-08343 (CA-17) (JJC). A lawsuit was filed against the City and its cable licensee, Miami Cablevision, on the basis of alleged cable installation problems. The City moved to dismiss the lawsuit because of a failure to state a cause of action. Subsequently, the Plaintiff agreed to dismiss the lawsuit as to the City. 41. Gragn/Vogel v. City, of Miami, Circuit Court Case No. 79- 21059 (LUP). The City in this case acted as the stake -holder for certain monies discovered when the Police Department searched the scene of a shooting incident. The lessee of the apartment, the person who was shot, failed to make any claim for the monies, but his landlords did. The City interpled the State of Florida under the Florida Unclaimed Property Act and while the Trial Court ruled in favor of the Plaintiffs, the Third District reversed and the Supreme Court denied Certiorari. A payment was made under the Florida Unclaimed Property Act to the Comptroller's Office in the amount of approximately $55,000.00. These same Plaintiffs, subsequent to the Supreme Court's denial of certiorari, filed a Sec. 1983 case in the United States District Court, which was considered by Judge Hoeveler, who dismissed the matter with prejudice. Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission 42. Case No. 86-07436 (JJC). July 24, 1986 Page 14 E The media filed a public records lawsuit to gain access to certain tape recordings made during the commission of a murder. The City denied access at the time claiming an exemption pursuant to active criminal investigation information. After a hearing at which the City presented evidenoe, Judge Rivkind agreed with the City's position and denied the petition for access to the tape. LAD/JLF/wpo/ab/pb/M041