On May 24th, 2005, Whitewater resident Steve Cvicker filed a federal lawsuit against Whitewater Police Department investigator Larry Meyer, individually and as a member of that department, among other parties. The case closed on September 15, 2008, with a signed stipulation for dismissal, following settlement.
Four years is not a long time for litigation, although more so in the federal system than in many state cases. It is enough time, during the pendency of the action, for a municipality and its employees to consider carefully their actions, and conduct, regarding a citizen’s claims.
Here I refer not to a legal response, but to a broader reflection that may be conducted even during litigation. A case like this will have many docket entries, stretching over years; the Meyer case, 05-cv-00576, is no exception (with over 100 entries).
If there is anyone, in the City of Whitewater, who pompously tells you that reflection and reform during a case is impossible, you may be certain that he is either ignorant, stupid, or a self-interested liar.
(We have all three groups in Whitewater, as every town does; there is much lay certainty in Whitewater among those who are unknowing. It’s as credible as if you heard someone at a bus stop who causally mentioned his latest effort to perfect a working fusion reactor using a ‘Brussard,’ design. Possible, but highly unlikely.)
I will offer three posts on the Meyer case: this brief overview, intervening events, how the press has managed to cover the case, and a collection of questions arising from it.
First, a recap as I have previously posted, with newer developments added. These are principal, but not all, developments in this constitutional lawsuit.
May 25, 2005, Whitewater resident Steve Cvicker filed a lawsuit in federal court against Whitewater investigator Larry Meyer, among others, alleging constitutional and civil rights violations. The case was assigned to federal Magistrate Judge William Callahan. Defendants subsequently answered, later amending their answer, to Cvicker’s complaint.
June 29, 2006, Defendant, Larry Meyer filed a motion for Summary Judgment (that is, that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party was entitled to judgment as a matter of law).
March 20, 2007, Judge Callahan denied Defendant, Larry Meyer’s motion for summary judgment regarding alleged constitutional violations of the Fourth Amendment. Cvicker’s lawsuit on those weighty grounds would continue; only his statutory claims were set aside.
May 14, 2007, Plaintiff, Cvicker submitted reports from his expert witnesses. Those expert reports included a well-experienced expert’s assessment of (1) the evasive, incomplete answers that Meyer gave under sworn deposition regarding his ‘investigation’ of Cvicker, and (2) Meyer’s unprofessional conduct and conduct in significant excess of his search warrant, involving seizure of personal items that led to the basis of Cvicker’s constitutional Fourth Amendment claim against Cvicker.
November 15, 2007, Defendant, Meyer submitted a motion to enforce a supposed settlement agreement between the parties and to dismiss the lawsuit with prejudice.
December 20, 2007, Plaintiff, Cvicker filed his brief in opposition to Meyer’s motion to dismiss.
January 22, 2008, Magistrate Judge William E Callahan Jr denied Defendant’s Motion to Enforce Settlement.
September 15, 2008, Magistrate Judge William E Callahan, Jr signs stipulation and dismissal on 9/15/08.
These suits are rare, especially so for a city so small as Whitewater, Wisconsin. One might expect that it might be met with some self-reflection.
Of course not — the failure that leads to this a lawsuit like this shuns introspection and self-reflection. There is nothing more predictable and commonplace than saying nothing, changing nothing.
You may save slogans, quotations, and an insistence on politeness as though it were a virtue from God Himself — it is enough to govern well.
Next: The Intervening Event.