Thursday, April 21, 2016

Killington seeks to dismiss Neisner case, again

Rutland Herald
By Lola Duffort

STAFF WRITER | April 21,2016
 
KILLINGTON — A new court filing by town lawyers ridicules the lawsuit filed by Killington resident and attorney Melvin B. Neisner Jr. as “hardly a model of clarity” and the result of personal vendetta.

In a suit filed against the town in December, Neisner alleges a litany of misdeeds by the town and by its former Town Manager, Seth Webb.

The town breached its fiduciary duty to tax payers by hiring Webb in the first place without doing a more thorough search, Neisner claims. The town also allegedly ignored Webb’s alleged incompetence and abuse of employees, failed to budget for a sewer bond, misappropriated town funds and signed a bum park-and-ride lease.

Neisner also claims the town violated state and federal public records laws when responding to records requests he made related to Webb.

Neisner, the town’s longtime moderator, first filed suit in a Rutland civil court, but the town petitioned to have the case moved to federal court, where it is now.

Echoing earlier filings by the town, Killington’s April 19 motion to dismiss the lawsuit characterizes Neisner as a frustrated office-seeker pursuing a grudge.

They noted Neisner wrote to the town to offer himself in Webb’s stead after the town first appointed Webb. Neisner has said in an interview the offer was made as a joke, and his court filings have made note of a later letter he sent the town saying he had “no desire” for the post, but that the Killington Selectboard should nevertheless look to replace Webb.

“Plaintiff Neisner’s second letter was nothing more than ‘sour grapes’,” the town’s motion argues, including a link to read the children’s fable online.

Webb, who was appointed as town manager in 2011, stepped down at the end of last year to take a position in the private sector. His last day as manager was Dec. 31. Deborah Schwartz, an airport executive and Arkansas transplant, took over this week as the town’s new manager.

The town’s April 19 motion argues that both state and federal law protect municipalities from having to pay monetary damages, which Neisner seeks; that many of his claims lack standing; that it’s too late to make such claims; and that he offers little proof.

The Neisner lawsuit has so far cost the town $4,441 in legal fees, Schwartz said.

Reached Wednesday, Neisner said he hadn’t seen the recent filing and couldn’t comment on it. But he did note this was the town’s second attempt to get the case kicked out of court.

“They filed a motion to dismiss and it was denied, you know that, don’t you?” he said.

Town officials have said a judge in early April denied a motion filed in January to dismiss the case because Neisner had since filed an amended complaint — making their earlier motion irrelevant.

The court’s docket entry itself states that the judge’s order denying the town’s motion to dismiss is “in light of the Amended Complaint.”

Told of the town’s position and the docket entry, Neisner said, “Well, then, you must be a lawyer.”

Asked if he had a different interpretation of the judge’s actions, Neisner reiterated loudly he didn’t want to comment.

“Don’t put words in my mouth,” he said. “And never call my cel phone. ... I’m coming down to that office, and I’m going to rip the phone off your hand, got it?”

lola.duffort

No comments: