City officials dodged a hefty price tag recently by settling a $30,000 lawsuit filed against the city that alleged “offensive use of Tasers” by police officers.

City officials dodged a hefty price tag recently by settling a $30,000 lawsuit filed against the city that alleged “offensive use of Tasers” by police officers.

While the cost of the lawsuit, and two additional unrelated complaints, did top out at approximately $50,000, corporation counsel Timothy Benedict said if all three matters went to court, the payout could have been much higher.

In a lawsuit filed against the city in September 2013, Rome resident Rafael Perez said he sustained injuries to his face, torso and back after being immobilized with a stun gun by a city police officer. The suit was worth upward of $4 million before Benedict and Perez’s attorney were able to agree on the $30,000 settlement.

“They came down considerably,” Benedict said. “The initial amount in the complaint was $2 million in compensatory damages and $2 million in punitive and attorney’s fees.”

Perez’s attorney Stephen Lockwood said the settlement is fair.

“We believe this settlement represents a fair result based on all the facts and circumstances,” Lockwood said. “Hopefully, it will deter future offensive use of Tasers by police officers against citizens.”

In the suit, Perez alleged that on May 7, 2013, he was approached by several officers who were investigating his possible involvement in a larceny. He refused to talk to them and walked away. Perez was then “Tased in the back” and fell to the ground, fracturing several

ribs, Lockwood said.

According to the complaint, Perez also suffered injuries as a result of being struck in the face, torso, back and hip by several officers. He was taken to the police department, where his requests for medical attention went unanswered, the complaint stated.

While Perez was being released, a police employee suggested he go to a hospital for his injuries, according to the complaint.

Benedict stressed that the city believes all officers involved in the incident acted appropriately and within the department’s policy and procedures, and that the lawsuit was settled without any admission of liability on the city’s part.

“From a risk assessment or cost-benefit analysis standpoint, while keeping in mind that we would have to hire a couple of experts and the cost of proceedings, we thought a settlement was appropriate and in the best interest of the city,” Benedict said.

The city also settled two complaints filed with the state Division of Human Rights in May 2013 by two Department of Public Works laborers who were fired, Benedict said.

“In theory, we would have been paying from the day they were terminated from their positions to the date of the award, which is essentially a full year’s salary,” Benedict said. “It probably would have totaled between $30,000 to $35,000 to each of them.”

Benedict said the city settled on the two complaints at $10,000 each due to lack of certainty with how the matter would be settled in court.

“We think we’re right but we also don’t want to put ourselves in a position to face a significantly high reward (to the complainants),” Benedict said. “A concrete number at a nuisance value would be much better for us.”