At the time of the study, the County was involved in 1,036 lawsuits as either a defendant or a plaintiff. Litigation can be divided into 2 broad categories:

Tort Litigation

Tort litigation is defined as a civil wrong or injury, other than contractual, for which the court may provide damages (e.g., personal injury, property damage).

Non-Tort Litigation

Non-tort suits involve a wide range of case types, including contract actions, personnel appeals, and litigation for code enforcement violations.

Funding criteria for the Insurance Fund reserve, including the basis for agency charges, were based primarily on historical claims and litigation payout data, rather than current case reserves, in accordance with Governmental Accounting Standards. The amount of the Insurance Fund was set by actuarial techniques, which utilize a variety of approaches based on historical data and loss patterns to project future litigation losses.

Finding III-1. Initial case data was entered on the CaseMaster automated system, but additional information was not consistently maintained.

The Prosecuting Attorney's Office entered initial case data (i.e., case name, date filed, assigned Civil Division section and attorney) on the CaseMaster automated system, which could be used to produce a written report of basic case information. Additional information (e.g., client agency, case type code) was not consistently maintained on the system by all sections, but was available for entry, depending on the information desired in a report.

Written Reports on Open Litigation May Increase the County's Liability by Inviting Similar Litigation

At the time of the study, regular reports to the Council on County litigation were limited to annual oral briefings by the Prosecuting Attorney's Office and the Risk Manager on all tort settlements over $50,000. Attorneys from the Prosecuting Attorney's Office expressed concern over issuing a written report of County litigation. Their position was that a report listing cases by type or including case summaries would help to pinpoint areas of liability, and if it became public, would invite similar litigation. The study found no definitive answer on the amount of risk that such a report would present. Attorneys from most jurisdictions contacted during the study agreed that a litigation report could increase liability, and their jurisdictions therefore did not issue written reports.

Snohomish and Yakima Counties did issue regular written reports listing open litigation and case type to their County Council and Board of Commissioners, respectively. Moreover, Snohomish County made its litigation report available to the public on request, and did not know of any negative consequences. The City of Tacoma also released a litigation report on public request. However, attorneys from these jurisdictions would not rule out the possibility that the information in their reports could be used against their jurisdictions.

The Civil Division Did Not Have Standard Procedures for Reporting to Client Agencies on Litigation

The study identified six options for reporting on open litigation:

1. Briefings for Councilmembers

   At the time of the study, the system of reporting to the Council on the County's open litigation consisted of annual briefings on all large tort settlements by the Prosecuting Attorney's Office and the Office of Risk Management. Oral briefings present the least exposure for the County because no documents are produced that could later become public; they also allow the Council opportunity for detailed questioning. Without a comprehensive list of cases, however, it may be difficult for the Council to know which cases it is interested in.

2. Expanded Briefings for Councilmembers

   Expanded briefings to the Council could provide information on more than just large settlements (e.g., litigation trends) and information that would not be readily apparent from a written list of cases. For example, since lawsuits often do not request a specific amount of damages, a written report might not convey the seriousness of a case.

3. Clerk's Litigation Log

   The Council Clerk maintains an automated litigation log with very brief information (i.e., plaintiff's name, date filed, case number, and a few key words identifying the complaint). The log is accessed on the Council network, and is already a public record. However, the information provided is minimal, and the log does not include litigation in which the County is the plaintiff.

4. Compilation of Case File Documents

   Documents from litigation case files contain a copy of the complaint (i.e., the plaintiff's allegations) and the court schedule, and identify the County attorney assigned to the case. All are public documents and so present little additional exposure for the County, while providing a lot of information on the nature of the complaint. However, complaints are often lengthy, and case type and client agency could be difficult to determine.

5. Reports Generated From CaseMaster

   The CaseMaster system can generate written reports. Beyond very basic initial case data, however, utilization of the system varies by section, and additional data would need to be entered, depending on the type of information desired in a report. CaseMaster reports (either this option or Number 6 below) would have the most concise format of any of the written options relative to the amount of information provided, but given the volume of County litigation, would still be lengthy (at least 40 pages), and code sheets would be necessary to interpret the case type code. The report could increase the County's liability by indicating areas of frequent litigation.

6. CaseMaster Report With Case Summaries and/or Case Status

   Case summaries and case type are not consistently maintained on the CaseMaster system, and thus would involve additional staff time to enter. Standard categories would also need to be developed for case status. In addition, the Prosecuting Attorney's Office indicated that they would need to screen case summaries for liability exposure, thus requiring additional attorney time.

The study recommended that the Council make a policy decision on whether it wants to receive regular written reports on litigation, and if so, what information the reports should contain.

The study also recommended that the Executive decide what information Executive agencies need to receive regularly from the Prosecuting Attorney's Office, and the format of that information.

In considering these options, it is important to bear in mind that the more information that is provided in writing, the greater is the County's potential liability exposure. Thus, an important factor in a decision on litigation reporting is the Council's desire for more information and the usefulness of that information, weighed against the potential for increasing the County's exposure to litigation.

Updated: 06/24/02