§ 31.23 LEGAL DEFENSE OF ELECTED OFFICIALS.
   (A)   For purposes of this section the following definitions shall apply unless the context clearly requires a different meaning:
      (1)   "ACTION IN TORT." Any claim for monetary damages based upon negligence, intentional tort, nuisance, products liability, and strict liability, and shall also include any wrongful death or survival-type action.
      (2)   "OFFICER." Any elected official of the city.
   (B)   Except as provided in division (E) below, the city shall, without cost to the officer, provide for the legal defense of any officer in any action in tort or contract arising out of an act or omission occurring within the scope of the officer’s employment or public duties with the city.
   (C)   The city may provide for the defense of any officer through its own legal counsel, by employing independent legal counsel, or by purchasing insurance which requires the insurer to defend. If the city defends through its own legal counsel and its legal counsel determines that the interests of the officer and the city conflict, the city shall obtain the written consent of the officer for such representation or shall provide independent representation. An officer may have his own legal counsel to assist in the defense at the expense of the officer.
   (D)   Upon receiving service of a summons and complaint in any action in tort or contract brought against him, an officer shall, within ten (10) days of his receipt of service, give written notice of the claim and make a request that the city provide a defense to the action. The notice of claim and request for defense shall be filed with the Mayor, or if the Mayor has been named a defendant in any such action, the notice of claim and request for defense shall be filed with the City Council.
   (E)   The city may refuse to provide for the defense of any action in tort or contract brought against an officer of the city if it determines and notifies the officer in writing that:
      (1)   The act or omission was not within the actual or apparent scope of the officer’s employment;
      (2)   The officer acted or failed to act because of fraud, malice, or corruption; or
      (3)   A timely request to defend was not made in accordance with division (D) above.
   (F)   If the city refuses to provide an officer with a defense and the officer provides his own defense, the officer shall be entitled to recover all necessary and reasonable costs of the defense from the city if the act or omission is judicially determined to have arisen out of the actual or apparent scope of the officer’s employment and the officer is found to have acted without fraud, malice, or corruption.
   (G) Subject to the limitation set forth in divisions (H) and (I) below, and provided that the city shall not pay any award of punitive or exemplary damages, the city shall pay any judgment rendered against an officer in any action in tort or contract, or any compromise or settlement of such action.
   (H) The city may refuse to pay any judgment, compromise, or settlement in any action in tort or contract against an officer, or if the city pays any judgment, compromise, or settlement, it may recover from the officer the amount of such payment and the costs to defend, if:
      (1) The officer acted or failed to act because of fraud, malice, or corruption;
      (2) The action was outside the actual or apparent scope of the officer’s employment;
      (3) The officer willfully failed or refused to assist the defense of the action; or
      (4) The officer compromised or settled the claim without the consent of the City Council.
   (I) An officer who is being provided a defense in an action in tort or contract by the city shall not enter into any compromise or settlement of the action without the approval of the City Council.
   (J) Nothing in this section shall be construed as a waiver of any defense which the city may assert in any action in tort or contract brought against it or any officer of the city. Defense by the city of any action shall not be deemed an admission by the city that the acts or omissions of the officer which gave rise to the action in tort or contract were within the actual or apparent scope of the officer’s employment or public duties with the city.