So, it’s not really clear from the records on the Domain Web site, but it appears that former Interim City Manager Ann Marie Gallant’s appeal has finally has made it’s way out of default and may be moving on. When last we left off, Ann Marie Gallant has appealed the judgment against her in her case against the City of Alameda and that for some reason the appeal was deficient in some way. On the deadline to cure the default there was a notice to the court report to prepare a transcript, which supposedly is a sign that the appeal is moving forward but there isn’t a record of something happening between the notice of default and the notice to prepare a transcript on the Court of Appeals website, so I’m not sure what it all means. However I am unwilling to shell out any money to look at the one register of actions on the Alameda County website that might shed some light on the issue the “Memo to Case Memo to Case File Filed.”
But what did get filed, which is why this is all so confusing is the Motion for Attorney’s fees which was filed by the City, because remember the City gets its money back per the ruling.
The amount they are requesting…
$330,500.56
As a reminder the judgment against David Kapler was in the neighborhood of $260,000, but that one ended rather quickly after the Court of Appeals ruling, so the additional cost is not surprising. I have the really large files of the motions that were file supporting the cost request, so if anyone wants it you can email me for a copy, but they’re rather hefty and repetitive some I”m not really going to bother with posting them.
If Ann Marie Gallant’s appeal did not go through then there is a hearing in early June where the decision would be made on whether or not the amount is reasonable or not. If the appeal is going forward, I would imagine that, if the City is successful in that appeal as well — the cost to defend against that appeal would be added to the running total. Although $330K is nothing to sneeze at so I can totally understand why Ann Marie Gallant would be reluctant to roll over and be expected to pay that, particularly since I’m guessing that after all these years she really feels like the wronged victim in all this. I’m not sure what her payment deal is with her attorney, but the last time I checked Ann Marie Gallant has new attorneys for this appeal so even if the last attorney worked on contingency, I’m not sure if this new one — given that she lost at the appellate level — would be willing to do the same this time around.
Blogging Bayport Alameda 
According to LinkedIn, she has a new job as Director at the Diocese of San Bernadino/Riverside. At least there’s money coming in, so the City might get paid.
Comment by Denise Shelton — May 13, 2014 @ 7:56 am
Riverside has high unemployment and foreclosures so there may not be money coming in…I think Riverside is sort of like the Stockton of Southern California.
Comment by Joseph — May 13, 2014 @ 6:00 pm
#2. The reference is to the Diocese, not the government, so if the Church has enough to pay her for whatever it is she does, she has employment and money coming in.
Comment by Kate Quick — May 14, 2014 @ 7:50 am
Given her track record of suing to get damages from the cities that she has worked, she would have money in reserve. Let’s hope Gallant does not sue the Diocese.
Comment by BarbaraK — May 14, 2014 @ 12:33 pm
Lena Tam betrayed the city & had her legal fees comped. Let Gallant off the hook.
Comment by dave — May 14, 2014 @ 5:22 pm
Riverside is NOT the Stockton of Southern California. It is a beautiful city with the Mission Inn, Fairmount Park, designed by the Olmsted and Olmsted, and a Julia Morgan designed YWCA that was turned into the Riverside Art Museum. Riverside is the home of the Parent Navel Orange trees and of the Citrus Experiment Station that became UC Riverside. Riverside’s industry began with citrus packing houses; Stockton’s history on the river led to a port/industrial orientation. U.S. Navy base closure played a part in Stockton’s financial troubles. I am sure Stockton has its good features, but though they are both county seats, I think Riverside and Stockton are quite different.
Comment by Kevis Brownson — May 14, 2014 @ 5:47 pm
Kevis what I meant is Riverside financials are much like Stockton’s high foreclosure rate, no money, ect…I wasn’t talking about their history. Stockton was building more and more housing developments as was Riverside the last time I was there. When the housing market/job market crashed 5 or 6 years ago Stockton and Riverside were hit very hard. Even after the Navy base closed in Stockton housing developments were popping up everywhere. Riverside had the same thing happening. Just drive from LA to Palm Springs now…Riverside expanded beyond its borders.
Comment by Joseph — May 15, 2014 @ 7:30 am
Lena Tam exposed the Gallant and Highsmith’s corruption. and had to defend herself against attacks from both. Not quite the same as suing the city because you believe you are entitled to a city manager job you never applied for.
Comment by BarbaraK — May 15, 2014 @ 12:08 pm