OK, so now What? (Part I)

Former Bristol County Prosecutor of the Year Ray Veary was sworn in as a judge very shortly before hearing, and later dismissing, Dr. Mary Ellen Johnson's suit against the Sandwich School Committee and four members individually.  Johnson's counsel later filed for reconsideration and pointed out what he saw as legal errors in the Judge's rulings.  The same Judge again denied he made any errors.

Johnson's counsel then appealed to the State Appeals Court who had some very pointed questions for the lawyers for the Town's insurance company who are defending the Town, and the four individually-named members.   In fact, two members of the three judge panel made it quite clear during the hearing that the contract in question was clearly valid because nobody bothered to meet the requirements of the law which clearly state that somebody must file for judicial review in order to invalidate an otherwise valid contract.

This week, the Appeals Court issued a full written opinion which stated that Superior Court erred in dismissing the case, reversed the prior ruling, and raised the following key points:

1) The ruling noted the number of public announcements which had been made for the meeting's continuation and found that the lower court's findings were premature and limited the plaintiff's ability to argue whether the meeting notice was adequate, and, if they were in fact inadequate, whether the violations were of any consequence. They went further to reference the Tebo-Shrewsbury case which stated (in part): "Concerning the asserted violations of the open meeting law, it is enough to record that the trial judge found that, fundamentally ... all parties had ample opportunity to be heard, and that, if any technical violations existed, they were de minimis. Accordingly, he concluded, no invalidation of action of the zoning board was warranted ..." In other words --- nobody ever proved there was a true violation of the Open Meeting La

2) The Court also stated that even IF there was an OML violation, the violation did not automatically invalidate the contract -- without judicial intervention. (Where have I heard that before?)

3) In order to get judicial intervention, a complaint must be filed with the court within 21 days by the Attorney General, District Attorney, or 3 taxpayers. And, although the district attorney's office was put on notice of the violation and had the opportunity to file a complaint to invalidate the contract, it chose not to and instead offered only an opinion letter with no legal effect.

4) Because no complaint was filed within 21 days (or at any time subsequent), the judgment was reversed.

So, Now What?

The case has been returned to Barnstable Superior Court. BUT, with a ruling from the State Appeals Court that a valid contract exists. There's not a lot left to argue -- as Johnson's attorney said in the CCT, ""It pretty much destroys their defenses," he said. "The residents and taxpayers in Sandwich have been ill-served."

My WAG (Wild Ass Guess) is that somebody at Town Hall will be getting a phone call from the insurance company, as soon as they realize that they have already lost on the most expensive question regarding the validity of contract? The carrier will probably soon refuse to cover any further legal costs and either force the Town into funding any additional litigation - or offering a settlement.

There may be some stalling tactics, feather ruffling, and chest thumping. There may still be some chatter about the personal liability claims against the four individual members. Johnson's contract may prohibit legal actions against individual Committee members on certain contractual issues ---- but its questionable whether that would include intentional malicious acts. But, as much fun as it would be watching Marshall, Crossman, Kangas and Linehan write out checks, that would, unfortunately, just be a sideshow to the main event -- a great big payment from the Sandwich Taxpayers.

What will it Cost and Who will pay for it?

The "who" is easy -- the Sandwich taxpayers. There may be a little help from School Counsel's malpractice insurance, and maybe even with some help from the Gang of Four's personal liability insurance (or their personal piggybanks), but the biggest piece of the pie is undoubtedly coming from the taxpayer -- the same folks who now buy trash bags from the Town and will soon be paying for school bus rides.

The "what" ? God only knows.  There's no doubt their actions caused injury and financial loss. They essentially incinerated Dr. Johnson's 30+ year career -- first by "un-renewing" her contract without ever stating a reason and then again with their "handling" of the employee "complaints".

If there's ever any question about the damage done to Dr. Johnson's reputation, just Google her name.

The School Department dismissed a pool employee under suspicious circumstances a few years ago.  The same employee later committed suicide when the Camp Good News Sex abuse allegations began to surface.  More recently, another School Pool employee with a previous criminal record was arrested on a variety of statutory rape and related charges.  A teacher was arrested for domestic assault.  How about the two employees who were sent home for being drunk on duty?  Nope.  In fact, their union filed grievances demanding they be reinstated and their records expunged.

So, does anyone recall them any of them being publicly banned from School Property ?  

Is "Overkill" one word or two?

Coming Soon --- Who is watching the Lawyers?