Atty. Fuchs' demand for $5 million

Atty. Arellano's demand for $275,000

This extravagant demand was contained in a "Notice of Claim" sent to Norquist's attorney Anne Shindell by Atty. John Fuchs on April 5, 2000. The document is a laundry list of charges against Norquist, including (1) Sexual harassment, racial discrimination and denial of equal protection; (2) Violations of Wisconsin Fair Employment Law; (3) Constructive discharge — forcing Figueroa to leave employment by creating intolerable conditions; (4) Breach of contract; (5) Emotional distress; (6) Defamation; and (7) Invasion of Privacy. For that, Fuchs wanted $5 million from Norquist, or an average of $625,000 per charge.

Figueroa says she simply wanted to go to court and tell her story to a judge and jury. She could have charged Norquist with felonious sexual assault, which she claims the mayor committed more than once, and, if proven, could land him in jail. She could have immediately filed sexual harassment charges. Instead, Figueroa waited until nine months after being terminated by the city before she filed a claim with any governmental body.

During this period, Figueroa was represented by three different lawyers and went through protracted negotiations with Shindell that were all about money.

"We had a demand for money from the very beginning," Shindell claims, beginning with Figueroa's first lawyer, state Rep. Pedro Colon (D-Milwaukee). "When I tried to discuss the legal aspects of the case," Shindell says, "Colon said 'I don't care. The bottom line is we want money.' " Shindell says Colon asked for $350,000 to $500,000.

"I'm not stupid," Shindell continues. "I know the difference between extortion and a legal case."

Colon says he will be suing Shindell for defamation. "They've tried to tell this story all over town and nobody believes them," Colon says.

Colon has retained Atty. Mark Thomson to represent him. Interestingly, Thomson confirms that money was discussed. He says Shindell offered Figueroa reinstatement in a city job at a salary of $75,000 for four years -- until Norquist's current term of office expires. This was actually comparable to the job the city had offered Figueroa a year earlier, paying $71,161, when she was still working for Norquist. The difference, if any, was this job would be guaranteed for four years.

Thomson says Colon simply converted that to a $350,000 settlement, with the argument that Figueroa did not want to work for an employer who discriminated against her.

Both sides, in short, agree a pay-off of at least $350,000 was discussed. Any such agreement would have come with a gag order, meaning neither side could publicly discuss it. So much for Figueroa's day in court.

Next up to bat was Fuchs, who increased the price by a cool $4.65 million. Fuchs says this was simply an early strategy. "Call it strategy, call it politics, call it sending a message to the other side, that maybe this will go to the Common Council and they will wonder whether the city would have to pay this kind of money," Fuchs says.

Fuchs says he has been reluctant to talk about the case because of attorney-client privilege, but since Figueroa and Shindell have disclosed all the details of the negotiations, he feels an obligation to clarify the record. Fuchs says Figueroa was always interested in money but also wanted to publicly shame Norquist. "One week it was 'I want money.' Then the next week it was 'I'm going to turn down the money, so I can have my story told.' "

The dilemma for Figueroa is that any monetary settlement would include a non-disclosure clause. So which did Figueroa choose? According to Shindell, "There was a point where Fuchs said 'all she [Figueroa] wants is money. The details are not relevant.' "

In an April 13 letter, Fuchs demanded $225,000. Shindell, as Figueroa has disclosed, was only offering $125,000 to $150,000.

One press account suggested Figueroa terminated Fuchs because she wanted more money. Fuchs doesn't deny this. "If a client wants a certain amount of money and the lawyer say it's not in the cards, then you go elsewhere," Fuchs says.

Figueroa did just that. She next went to Madison to find an attorney, Victor Arellano of Lawton & Cates. An "offer of settlement" sent to Shindell by Arellano on November 22, 2000, warned that "we plan to file our claim on Monday, November 27, 2000, with the State of Wisconsin Equal Rights Division..."

"As you are aware, no news coverage has taken place with respect to this matter," Arellano wrote. "I have instructed my client to remain silent on these issues in order to avoid any unnecessary publicity. However, once this case is filed with the ERD at the state level, all of the details will become public as a matter of law. I have proposed to Ms. Figueroa that we attempt to put this painful matter to rest for the amount of $275,000 in exchange for a confidential release of all claims."

But Arellano didn't file the claim on November 27. Instead, he and Figueroa decided to wait, after Shindell requested more time to consider a cash settlement. Once again, money was more important to Figueroa than her day in court.

Granted, most lawyers would prefer an out-of-court settlement for cash because that approach is less risky and takes less work. But none of the four lawyers involved in this case seemed to think it had much chance if it was litigated.

Colon says he never filed a case of sexual harassment or racial discrimination, and never wrote a legal complaint of any kind. Fuch's notice of claim argued Figueroa had grounds for both a state and federal action, but nothing was ever filed. Indeed, according to Figueroa, Fuchs told her she didn't have much of a case. Arellano's November 27th letter to Shindell warned that Figueroa would pursue a federal civil rights case against Norquist, but no filing has ever been made. Arellano did eventually file a state case, but only after delaying to hold out for a cash settlement, and only after Norquist himself went to the press with the story.

The other lawyer involved, Shindell, has handled numerous sexual harassment cases representing both plaintiffs and defendants, and thought it was such a weak case that she went along with her client John Norquist's decision not to pay a settlement and fight it out legally.

That leaves Figueroa, who says she preferred legal action but consistently went along with a strategy that pursued cash instead. And, as Shindell has pointed out, Figueroa chose not to file a lawsuit, which can result in penalties for a plaintiff who makes false charges. Instead, she went to the state ERD, where she cannot be penalized. Good strategy, no doubt, but not the action of someone who wants to go before a judge and jury.