HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions - 1988.09.08 - 176284(e47e-41106/'
r
Y APPROVE THE FOR EGOtNG RESOLUTION
CcfuntY Ex
41116.-al
T. Murphy
Y APPROVE THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION
August 18, 1988
MISCELLANEOUS RESOLUTION # 88205
BY: FINANCE Ca/MITTEE, DR. G. WILLIAM CADDELL, CHAIRPERSON
IN RE: •LIABILITY CLAIMS PROCEDURES AND POLICIES. FOR OAKLAND COUNTY
TO THE OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Mr. Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen:
WHEREAS the Board of Commissioners by Miscellaneous Resolution #85367
directed the County Executive to seek outside consultation to establish an
adequate self insurance and risk management program; and
WHEREAS Miscellaneous Resolution 1186276 established a Claims Review
Committee, guidelines for payment of claims, and procedures to assign
legal services to process claims; and
WHEREAS Miscellaneous Resolution #86324 created a Risk Manager
Position to direct and coordinate the County's entire risk management
program; and
WHEREAS the Risk Manager has reviewed the current policies and
procedures and node recomendations in the attached report.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the attached Liability Claims
Procedures and Policies be adopted.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the adopted policies be reviewed within
one year and aodified if necessary.
Mr. Chairperson, I move the adoption of the foregoing resolution.
FINANCE CCMMITTEE
County of Oakland
Liability Ciaims •.Procedures
I. Claims Settlement Authority
A. 0 to $10,000
Joint approval of Corporation Counsel and the Risk Manager.
B. $10,000 to $50,000
Approval of Committee comprised of 2 members appointed by the
Chairman of the Board of Commissioners, 2 members appointed by
the County Executive and the Risk Manager.
C. $50,000 SE Above
Approval of Committee comprised of 2 members appointed by the
Chairman of the Board of Commissioners, 2 members appointed by
the County Executive and the Risk Manager. Members of the
Finance Committee vote on actual approval,
II. Defense Counsel
A. Assignment of Defense Counsel
The three current law firms handling defense work should
continue to be retained. An initial review indicates that the
three firms appear competent. The current system is to assign
cases on a .rotating basis in order to develop expertise in these
firms in the various unique liability exposure areas of the
County; such as, prisoner civil rights, employment discharge
cases, judges liability, etc. It is recommended that the maximum
number of firms retained at any one time be three (3). Too many
firms would lead to confusion in managing cases and reduce the
County's importance to these firms because of the limited number
of liability cases assigned by the County.
Assignment of special cases to firms, not done on a roster
basis, should be done on a joint basis (agreement between
Corporation Counsel and the Risk Manager) as to the appropriate
firm to nandle a case. This may necessitate some breaks in the
order of assignment of cases. In the long run, however, the
assignment roster should even out. This recommendation is, of
course, subject to further modification in the event that some
form of insurance or reinsurance program is implemented. In
those situations, counsel will be subject to the further approval
of the insurers and/or reinsurers. The recommendations
concerning assignment of counsel pertain to County Liability
(tort) cases only.
It is further recommended that cases involving employee
allegations arising out of the course of their employment, such
as, wrongful discharge, sexual harassment, etc., be assigned to
outside counsel to avoid any appearance of conflict.
The above recommendations are based upon prior experience in
the private sector and the Michigan governmental sector in claims
management and control. Close management of litigation by
Corporation Counsel, Risk Management, County Executive and the
Board Representatives will implement a firm but fair claims
philosophy which will reduce claims costs and ultimately,
settlement and trial values. If a case is to be defended based
on the facts, after complete investigation and analysis, a total
effort should De made to win, We must convey to the legal
community our philosophy in regards to litigation. Conversely,
should a case be deemed meritorious for settlement, a prompt and
equitable settlement should be attempted.
B. Selection of Replacement Defense Firms
Selection Committee comprised of Corporation Counsel, Risk
Manager, and 1 member of the Board of Commissioners appointed by
the Board Chailman. The Committee shall select a firm and their
recommendation shall be confirmed by the Board Chairman and
County Executive.
Approved by Finance Committee August 11, 1988
COUNTY MICHIGAN
DEPARTMENTOF CENTRAL SERVICES
Daniel I Murphy, Oakland County Executive
GeraW F. Mathews, Insutance and Safety
February 23, 1988
TO: Mr. Daniel T. Murphy
County Executive
Oakland County
Mr. Roy Rewold
Chairman ) Board of Commissioners
Oakland County
FROM: Stanley B. Fayne
Risk Management and Safety
Oakland County
SUBJECT: Liability Claims Procedures and Policies for Oakland County.
A primary requisite for a successful claims management program is the
implementation of a uniform philosophy in the handling and management of
claims. This is essential in conveying the philosophy developed on behalf of
the county to its defense attorneys, claimants and members of the plaintiffs'
bar.
With the development of a consistent philosophy, close management of
claims and a firm but fair claim philosophy, the cost of claims, number of
claims and ultimate defense costs should be reduced.
A uniform claims policy and successful case management is dependant upon
direct control in the management of cases by the professional staff employed
by an organization. In this instance the primary responsibility for the
management and settlement of claims should be assigned to the Corporation
Counsel and Risk Manager jointly. The objective of establishing supervisory
control of the files between Corporation Counsel and Risk Management ensures
proper management of the file and review by different disciplines.
Supervision of this function and assurance that the policies promulgated by
the County Executive and the Board of Commissioners are in fact complied with
should be with the County Executive and the Chairman of the Board of
Commissioners or their designees.
ExecWiveCWiceBuiding 1200 North Telegraph Road Pontiac, Michigan 48053-1084 (313) 858-1087
February 23, 1968
Liability Claims Procedures and Policies
Page 2
The correct claime philosophy will at times cause increased Costs on the
part of the County due to additional fees required to kmplement efficient
def•oe4 strategies. Conversely, when a claim is appropriate for eettelment,
settlement should be prompt, equitable and with a minimum amount of legal
expense incurred.
Claims Settlement Authority
$0 to $15,000
The authority for the settlerent of claims at this level Mould be subject
to the joint approval of Corporation Ccensel and the Risk Manager. The limit
of the autnority ($15,000) should be exclusive of administrative Coots.
.15,0000 to $30,000
The authority for aettlement of claims within these limits should be
comprised of tha Risk Menager, the Chairman of the Board of Commissioner& or
his designated repreaentative and the County Executive or his designated
repreaentative.
130,000 to $100,000
The authority for settlement of claims at this level should be delegated
to the Risk Manager, the Chairman of the Board of Commissioners and/or his
designee(s) (total of two), the County Executive or his designee(s) (total of
two) and a representative of the law firm handling the litigation, in an
advisory capacity.
$100,000 and above
The authority for settlement of claims at this level should be delegated
to the finance committee of the Board of Commissioners and the five (5) voting
menbers of the $30,000 to $100,000 committee and a representative of the
defense firm in an advisory capacity.
aigr ant of Defense. Counsel
The three currant law firms handling defense work should continue to be
retained. An initial review indicates that the three firma appear competent.
The current system is to assign camas on a rotating basis in order to develop
expertise in these firma in the various unique liability exposure areas of the
County : Ruth as, prisoner civil rights, employment discharge easels, judges
liability, etc. It is recataionded that the maximum number of firms
February 23, 1988
Liability Claims Procedures and Policies
Page 3
retained at any one time be three (3). Too many firms would lead to confusion
in managing cases and reduce the County's importance to these firms because of
the limited number of liability cases assigned by the County.
Selection of replacement firm(s) should be based on the recommendation of
the Corporation Counsel and the Risk Manager jointly to the County Executive
and the Chairman of the Board and subject to their approval. Corporation
Counsel and the Risk Manager should interview and quality three (3) firms.
The Chairman and the Executive could select one or more firms or reject all
three (3) firms and request additional recommendations.
Assignment of special cases to firma, not done on a roster basis, should
be done on a joint basis (agreement between Corporation Counsel and the Risk
Manager) as to the appropriate firm to handle a case. This may necessitate
some breaks in the order of assignment of cases. In the long run, however,
the assignment roster should even out. This recommendation is, of course,
subject to further modification in the event that some form of insurance or
reinsurance program is implemented. In those situations, counsel will be
subject to the further approval of the insurers and/or reinsurers. The
recommendations concerning assignment of counsel pertain to County Liability
(tort) cases only.
It is further recommended that cases involving employee allegations
arising out of the course of their employment, such as, wrongful discharge,
sexual harassment, etc., be assigned to outside counsel to avoid any
appearance of conflict.
The above recommendations are based upon prior experience in the private
sector and the Michigan governmental sector in claims management and control.
Close management of litigation by Corporation Counsel, Risk Management, County
Executive and the Board Representatives will implement a firm but fair claims
philosophy which will reduce claims costs and ultimately, settlement and trial
values. If a case is to be defended based on the facts, after complete
investigation and analysis, a total effort should be made to win. We must
convey to the legal community our philosophy in regards to litigation.
Conversely, should a case be deemed meritorious for settlement, a prompt and
equitable settlement should be attempted.
It is further suggested that the policy be reviewed after one year of
implementation to determine if the claims settlement authority currently
established should be revised.
SBF/bkh
cc: Dr. G. William Caddell, Chairperson, Finance Committee
Kenneth Q. Burchill, Deputy, County Executive
Jack Hays, Corporation Counsel
CLARIFICATION
$100,000 and above
The authority for settlement of claims at this level should
be delegated to the Finance Committee of the Board of Commissioners
after recommendation of the five voting members of the $30,000
to $100,000 Committee.
September 1.9Pf4
ALLEN, County Clerk/Register of 1 *
day of
1
8th this .
. _
. Miscellaneous Resolution # 88205 September 8, 1988
Moved by Page supported by Susan Kuhn the Board reconsider the vote taken
on August 18, 1988 on resolution #88205 (Liability Claims Procedures and Policies
for Oakland County),
AYES: Wilcox, Aaron, Bishop, Crake, Doyon, Gosling, Hobart, Jensen,
R. Kuhn, S. Kuhn, Lanni, McConnell, McDonald, A. McPherson, R. McPherson,
Moffitt, Oaks, Page, Pernick, Price, Rewold, Rowland, Skarritt. (23)
NAYS: None. (0)
A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the motion to reconsider
carried.
Moved by Page supported by Susan Kuhn the resolution be amended under
Section I-C by changing the Committee appointments by the Board of Commissioners
and County Executive from 2 members to read "3 members appointed by the Board
of Commissioners and 3 members appointed by the County Executive." Also, under
2-B delete "...confirmed by the Board Chairman and County Executive" and insert
"...confirmed by the Finance Committee."
AYES: Aaron, Bishop, Crake, Doyon, Gosling, Hobart, Jensen, R. Kuhn,
S. Kuhn, Lanni, McConnell, McDonald, A. McPherson, R. McPherson, Moffitt, Oaks,
Page, Price, Rewold, Rowland, Skarritt, Wilcox. (22)
NAYS: None. (0)
A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the amendment carried.
• Vote on resolution as amended:
AYES: Bishop, Crake, Doyon, Gosling, Hobart, Jensen, R. Kuhn, S. Kuhn,
Lanni, McConnell, McDonald, A. McPherson, R. McPherson, Moffitt, Oaks, Page,
Pernick, Rewold, Rowland, Skarritt, Wilcox, Aaron. (22)
NAYS: None. (0)
A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the resolution, as amended,
was adopted.
STATE OF MICHIGAN)
COUNTY OF OAKLAND)
1, Lynn D. Allen, Clerk of the County of Oakland and having a seal, do hereby certify that I have compared the annexed copy of the attached
Miscellaneous Resolution adopted by the Oakland CountyBoard of Commissioners at
their regular meeting ,held on September 8, 1988
with the original record thereof now remaining in my office, and
that it is a true and correct transcript therefrom, and of the whole thereof.
In Testimony Whereof, 1 have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal or said County at Pontiac, Michigan