Laserfiche WebLink
COUNTY OF HAWAII <br />Darr of H�k <br />o <br />1tE OF•H'.� <br />RESOLUTION NO. <br />STATE OF HAWAII <br />266 25 <br />A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INDEMNIFICATION OF A FORMER EMPLOYEE <br />OF THE COUNTY WHO IS NAMED AS AN INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANT IN THE <br />LAWSUIT KNOWN AS DAVID J FREEDMAN V. COUNTY OF HAWAI `I, ET AL. <br />AGAINST ALL DAMAGES ASSESSED THEREIN AND MAKING OTHER FINDINGS <br />IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2-188 OF THE HAWAI`I COUNTY CODE. <br />WHEREAS, on June 7, 2023, Plaintiff DAVID J. FREEDMAN (hereinafter "Plaintiff') <br />commenced a civil action against the COUNTY OF HAWAI`I (hereinafter "the County") known <br />as David J. Freeman v. County of Havvai `i, Civil No. 3CCV-23-0000218 (hereinafter "the <br />Lawsuit"); and <br />WHEREAS, on or around October 7, 2024, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint <br />in the Lawsuit, attached hereto as Exhibit A (hereinafter "the Complaint"), naming former <br />Director of the County's Department of Research and Development DOUGLASS S. ADAMS in <br />his individual capacity as a Defendant in the Lawsuit ("Adams"), and alleging claims against the <br />County and Adams for employment discrimination, emotional distress and negligent supervision; <br />and <br />WHEREAS, Section 2-188(a) of the Hawaii County Code (hereinafter "the Code") <br />requires the adoption of a resolution by the Council in order to effectuate the joint defense of the <br />County and Adams in the Lawsuit, including but not limited to the payment of all claims, <br />whether by settlement or judgment; and <br />WHEREAS, representation of Adams by the Corporation Counsel and her authorized <br />representatives is not an admission of liability; now, therefore, <br />BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAI`I that, in <br />accordance with Section 2-188(a) of the Code, this body finds that: <br />I. Any acts or failures to act by Adams, as alleged in the Complaint, was done within <br />the course and scope of Adams' employment as an employee of the County; <br />2. Any acts or failures to act by Adams, as alleged in the Complaint, were done in <br />good faith, without actual malice, to serve the County, and in the apparent best <br />interests of the County; <br />3. Payment of the claims or judgment of the Lawsuit would be in the best interests of <br />the County; and <br />