A former top Los Angeles city attorney authorized a class-action lawsuit against the city in hopes of obtaining a favorable settlement for Los Angeles and then repeatedly misled the court and the public about his role in the scheme, a judge ruled Tuesday.
In a 50-page ruling, California Bar Court Judge Yvette D. Roland found that Jim Clark, the former chief deputy attorney at the time, was the city attorney. Mike Feuer is guilty of “multiple acts of moral turpitude and concealment” related to his involvement in the legal ramifications of the City Attorney’s Office’s handling of the Department of Water and Power’s billing system failure.
Rowland recommended that Clark’s law license be revoked for two years, with the condition that he take various ethics and law-related courses.
The decision will go to the state Supreme Court for approval unless either party appeals.
“This decision is both unjust and wrong,” said Clark’s attorney, Erin Joyce. “We are considering next steps, including an appeal.”
Chief trial attorney George Cardona said in a statement that the court found Clark “engaged in serious misconduct, characterized by a prolonged pattern of deception that seriously undermined the public’s trust and confidence in the City Attorney’s Office.”
Read more: Trump Justice Department hires voting rights lawyer behind L.A. case cited by conspiracy theorists
“Regardless of the position held by attorneys who engage in such conduct, the State Bar remains committed to pursuing such misconduct,” Cardona said.
The scandal dates back to 2013, when a new DWP billing system issued incorrect bills to thousands of customers, including the Van Nuys for nearly $52,000.
The judge found that Clark helped oversee a friendly class-action lawsuit against the city as the city faced multiple lawsuits over billing issues. Because attorneys on the plaintiff side of the lawsuit colluded with the city’s team, the city was able to settle the claim on favorable terms.
After the bogus lawsuit was revealed, Clark and others in the city attorney’s office blamed other attorneys. The city attorney’s office has also spent tens of millions of dollars on outside attorneys in related cases, and Clark and others have repeatedly denied wrongdoing.
Clark left the city in 2020, a year after the FBI raided City Hall as part of a criminal investigation related to false claims. He never faced criminal charges.
Jamie Court, president of the consumer watchdog group, said Clark should receive harsher penalties, including being banned from practicing law in the state.
“If you are not going to lose your California law license for committing fraud and coordinating a conspiracy scheme in court, what is the purpose of the state bar?” the court said.
Clark’s trial lasted 32 days and spanned several months.
Read more: There is no fee for “captain”. Hollywood’s detective claims LAPD mishandled leaks in CBS executive’s case
As the trial draws to a close, an unexpected witness shocks the entire case.
Department of Transportation attorney Michael Nagle testified that he met Clark in March 2015 in a City Hall hallway.
Clark nonchalantly told Nagle that a class-action lawsuit was about to be filed against the city, which would benefit the city. This comment is noteworthy because Clark likely would not have advance knowledge of the impending legal action.
Nagel testified that after he read a news report last year in which Clark denied any wrongdoing related to the class action lawsuit, he felt compelled to come forward and reveal the conversation to the state bar court.
Sign up for Essential California to get news, features and recommendations from the Los Angeles Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
This story originally appeared in the Los Angeles Times.
