Natali lawsuit vs. SF declared "moot"

Greetings friends,

As you may have heard, the CA Superior Court has issued a decision in the
case of Les Natali vs. the SF HRC, declaring Mr. Natali's lawsuit against
the City to be "moot." Below please find a copy of the BAR's UPDATED
"breaking news" article about the judge's decision, as well as a perspective
on the ruling by sometime-BAR and SF Guardian contributing writer Tommi
Avicoli Mecca.

Updated breaking news: Judge dismisses Natali suit against HRC
Published 02/15/2007

by Matthew S. Bajko

m.bajko [at] ebar.com

Print this
Page<http://ebar.com/common/inc/article_print.php?sec=news&article=1577>
Send
to a Friend <http://ebar.com/common/inc/staf.php?sec=news&article=1577>

Castro bar owner Les Natali learned this week he had lost his legal battle
to overturn an initial city finding that he had engaged in racist business
practices. A Superior Court judge threw out his case against the city's
Human Rights Commission in an order signed last Wednesday, February 7. Yet
the judge's decision in the case set off another round of back and forth
between city officials and lawyers for Natali. Both sides claimed the ruling
as a victory.

City Attorney spokesman Matt Dorsey said the city is "gratified" by the
court's decision.

"It has always been our position there was nothing to litigate in this case
and the court clearly agreed," he said Thursday, February 15 after the city
received a copy of the court's ruling.

Larry Brinkin, the HRC compliance officer who oversaw the agency's
investigation into the accusations, said the agency is "pleased with the
court's ruling." He said even though the staff findings have not been
overturned, legally, they have no effect on Natali or his businesses.

"The city did find that Les engaged in racist business practices but because
the process was never completed that finding did not become operative," he
said. "There is no more the city will do with that finding because it is now
inoperative."

But in a statement released Friday, February 16, Natali's attorney Dennis
Riordan also sounded triumphant despite the judge's dismissal of his
client's suit. Riordan interpreted the judge's action as a win for Natali
and claimed the decision had in fact found the HRC report "void."

"The public record now is clear that Mr. Natali has not been found to have
discriminated at the Badlands, and indeed he never has done so," stated
Riordan, referring to the 18th Street bar in the Castro Natali owns. "The
Human Rights Commission's finding was a result of politics, not careful or
fair fact finding, and never should have been issued in the first place."

After seeing Riordan's statement, Dorsey insisted on Friday that on every
issue Natali raised with the court, he had lost.

"Mr. Natali's lawsuit asked the court to declare the HRC finding null and
void, to declare HRC lacked authority to issue those findings, and order the
city to pay his attorney's fees and costs. That lawsuit failed on every
single count," said Dorsey. "I will say this horse has been dead for more
than a year and it is time for him to stop beating it."

The legal dispute involved a staff HRC report issued on April 26, 2005 that
sided with eight complainants who accused Natali of engaging in
discrimination against women and African Americans at his bar SF Badlands in
the Castro. However, before HRC director Virginia Harmon could make the
findings official, both Natali, who has repeatedly denied the charges, and
the complainants entered into mediation.

The two sides settled and entered into a confidential agreement in January
last year. But in December Natali sued the HRC, saying despite the fact the
initial findings were unofficial they were still causing harm to his
reputation and business.

The city countered there was no merit to Natali's lawsuit since there was no
official city finding in the matter. The city's legal argument walked a fine
line between arguing that the initial findings were valid but had no legal
authority since the matter was successfully mediated before a final
director's finding was released.

Judge Ronald E. Quidachay sided with the city, writing in a three-paragraph
ruling that Natali's request "that this court issue writ relief finding that
respondents were unauthorized to issue the April 26, 2005 director's finding
and directing that it be withdrawn, is moot."

Quidachay dismissed the suit "since the matter was subsequently resolved
through mediation, and all claims pending before respondent Human Rights
Commission in that matter were withdrawn, without the issuance of any
further finding or determination by respondents."

Once the matter was successfully mediated, Brinkin said, "Our findings
ceased to have any legal effect from that point forward, not in the past but
that point forward. That is why judge said it is moot."

In his statement, Riordan fired off one more attack against the HRC's
report. He claimed that, during the course of the litigation, the legal team
learned that the City Attorney's office, when consulted about the proposed
finding, had advised HRC staff against issuing it.

"Rather than protecting human rights, the commission in this case violated
the due process rights of Mr. Natali. We hope this sorry chapter in its
history prompts the commission to act more judiciously in the future," wrote
Riordan. Before its release to the public, sources at the time had said the
city attorney's office did raise questions about some of the conclusions HRC
staff had reached. But they said never was it advised that the HRC should
not issue its findings.

Dorsey said Friday that he could not comment on what advice was given to HRC
staff due to attorney-client privilege. He did state that Riordan "would
have no way of knowing" what he claimed in his statement.

***************
And in the words of political commentator and LGBT activist Tommi Avicoli
Mecca:

"The CA Superior Court has ruled that Les Natali's suit against the city of
SF is "moot!" (He should have said "frivolous!") Natali sued, asking that
the initial findings of the SF Human Rights Commission be overturned. Those
findings concluded that Natali engaged in racist practices at his Badlands
bar in the Castro. After months of protests outside the bar by And Castro 4
All (in coalition with a whole host of groups), a secret settlement was
eventually reached between the parties even before HRC director Virginia
Harmon could make the finding official."

"Natali went to court saying that though there was a settlement, the
existence of those initial findings was still hurting his business and
reputation. He wanted the findings overturned and compensation from the
city. WELL, it ain't gonna happen. As a result of the judge's decision
there's NO overturning or setting-aside of the original findings of
discrimination at Badlands (those findings stand!), and NO compensation to
Les from the City."