. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nap Time!!!

Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Text of resolution

A Resolution in Support of the ASUC

Authored by Senators Ansary, Asuncion, Avelino, Averbach, Chen, Garcia, Law, Lee, Manassero, Moon, Nankin, Nguyen (Vivienne), Park, Rizzo, & Finance Officer Desai

WHEREAS, a dispute occurred during the Spring 2006 ASUC Elections which resulted in an initial decision by the Judicial Council, entitled Ratto v. Vakil, which voided the results of the election in that the elected officers were not permitted to take office; and,

WHEREAS, as a result of the aforesaid Judicial Council decision, litigation resulted in the Alameda County Superior Court against the Association entitled Gabriel v. Associated Students of the University of California, Action No. RG 06 278203; and,

WHEREAS, because of the conflict of interest on the part of ASUC Counsel, outside counsel had to be retained to defend the Association in the litigation and to consult with the Judicial Council; and,

WHEREAS, following the filing of the aforesaid lawsuit, the Judicial Council reversed its holding and reinstated the results of the student body election so that the officers elected could take office; and,

WHEREAS, as a result of the action taken by the Judicial Council the litigation filed in Alameda County Superior Court was voluntarily dismissed; and,

WHEREAS, it was necessary to pay outside counsel hired to represent the Association in the litigation and to consult with the Judicial Council for fees earned and,

WHEREAS, counsel for plaintiffs in the case of Gabriel v. ASUC, Action No. RG 06 278203 have requested that their fees for representation of plaintiff be paid by ASUC; and,

WHEREAS, the Association has a Legal Defense Fund to pay for such expenditures; and,

WHEREAS, after considering the issue at its 2/9/2005 Senate meeting, the Association paid the legal fees of plaintiffs in an earlier case involving student body elections entitled DAAP v. ASUC, US Dist Ct No C 04 1921 to settle the case; and,

WHEREAS, there is now an opportunity to settle all matters having to do with the litigation between all parties and in consideration thereof.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that up to Twenty-Two Thousand Six Hundred and Seventy-Nine Dollars ($22,679) be authorized to be paid out of the ASUC Legal Defense Fund to settle all claims from plaintiff for fees incurred; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the ASUC Senate and Executives work together to amend the ASUC By-laws to avoid such election mishaps in future ASUC elections.

posted by Beetle Aurora Drake 10/10/2006 02:59:00 PM #
Comments (1)
. . .
Wasn't it "titled" Ratto v. Vakil?
Post a Comment

. . .