Chief Judge Brenda Weaver Cleared of Retaliatory Prosecution Claim
A federal judge in Atlanta has thrown out a civil rights lawsuit filed against the chief Superior Court judge of the Appalachian Judicial Circuit.
November 05, 2019 at 02:43 PM
6 minute read
Three years after the chief judge of Georgia's Appalachian Judicial Circuit helped orchestrate the indictment of a local newspaper publisher and his attorney, a federal judge in Atlanta has thrown out a civil rights case accusing the judge of retaliatory prosecution.
Mark Thomason, publisher of now defunct Fannin Focus, and his lawyer, Hiawassee attorney Russell Stookey, filed the suit against Chief Superior Court Judge Brenda Weaver in 2018—two years after they were arrested on felony charges stemming from a separate public records fight. The court battle stemmed from Thomason's attempts to obtain a copy of an official recording of a local court hearing and, with Stookey's help, subpoena bank records of Weaver's county judicial operating account.
In dismissing the retaliatory prosecution claim, District Judge Steve Jones said in an order handed down Sept. 17, that his decision turned on a key question: whether Weaver induced the district attorney, who was her former law clerk, to bring charges against Thomason and Stookey that wouldn't have been initiated otherwise.
Jones, the former chairman of the state's judicial watchdog commission, determined that an objective law enforcement officer could have believed Thomason's and Stookey's haphazard attempts to serve a subpoena at the bank where Weaver had her county operating account, the circumstances that prompted the subpoena, and their failure to notify the judge, provided sufficient probable cause to charge the two men with identity fraud and attempted identity fraud.
Jones also found that an objective officer could have reasonably believed probable cause existed to arrest Thomason for making a false statement in a public records request to the chairman of the Pickens County Commission in which he suggested some county checks he sought may have been illegally cashed.
"Based on the totality of the circumstances, that even if there was no probable cause for plaintiffs' arrests, there was arguable probable cause and Judge Weaver is entitled to qualified immunity," Jones held.
Qualified immunity from litigation protects government officials from liability claims associated with carrying out their public duties unless they exercise their authority irresponsibly.
The 2016 arrests of Thomason and his attorney alarmed media organizations across the state, which protested whether the criminal charges were warranted. They also voiced concern that the indictment was intended to silence a media critic.
Weaver—who launched the investigation of the journalist and his attorney and then testified before the grand jury as an alleged crime victim—soon reconsidered pursuing the case and asked the district attorney to drop the charges.
At the time, Weaver acknowledged that her own investigation had likely confused the district attorney's staff in their attempts "to objectively investigate the case."
"We're disappointed in the ruling," said Atlanta attorney Gerry Weber, who represented Thomason and Stookey. "We think it sends a chilling message to journalists who may simply be using legal processes like open records requests and subpoenas to investigate their stories. Weber was co-counsel with Atlanta attorney Jeffrey Filipovits and Joshua Kendrick of South Carolina firm Kenrick & Leonard. He said there has not been a final decision made on whether to appeal.
Weaver, who could not be reached, was represented by the Georgia Attorney General's Office.
"We respect the Court's decision," Attorney General Chris Carr's spokeswoman said. The AG, she added, routinely "and as a courtesy" provides representation to judges and employees of the judicial branch in "a wide array" of civil actions.
Last year, the state Judicial Qualifications Commission cleared Weaver of similar allegations that she violated the state Judicial Code of Conduct when she launched the investigation that resulted in felony charges against Thomason and Stookey. Weaver was the JQC chairwoman at the time. Weaver resigned after multiple complaints stemming from the indictment were filed against her with the JQC.
In his order, Jones singled out the somewhat ham-handed methods Stookey and Thomason undertook in attempting to subpoena Weaver's bank records and their failure to ensure Weaver was informed of the subpoena.
He also highlighted as false Thomason's statement in his open records request that several banks had indicated the checks were cashed illegally.
Weaver learned about the bank subpoena when she was informed of Thomason's open records allegation, according to Jones' order.
In support of her motion for summary judgment, Weaver claimed her investigation and the criminal charges against Thomason and Stookey were based, in part, on her prior knowledge that Thomason's attorney allegedly made false statements during the journalist's legal fight with a county court reporter—claims that counsel for the two men vehemently disputed. Weaver also cited Thomason's "reputation for financial difficulties" and earlier scrapes with the law, Jones noted.
Jones said that background was relevant to Weaver's argument that there was sufficient probable cause to seek criminal charges against Stookey and Thomason.
Jones also said in his order that, although Weaver knew Thomason's allegation of potential criminality in his open records request was false, "She nevertheless asked the county financial officers at each of the three counties in the circuit to review their banking records to see whether any checks for the court's operating accounts had been improperly cashed."
Letters from each of the county financial officers in the circuit concluded that no checks were cashed illegally, Jones wrote.
Jones also said that Weaver brought in the Georgia Bureau of Investigation only after the bank refused to give her a copy of Thomason's subpoena. And although Weaver testified before the grand jury that indicted Thomason and his lawyer, Weaver did not tell District Attorney Alison Sosebee what charges should be made against Thomason or Stookey, and had nothing to do with Sosebee's decision to prosecute, Jones said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGeorgia Appeals Court Cancels Hearing in Election Interference Case Against Trump
3 minute readJustice Department Says Fulton County Jail Conditions Violate Detainee Rights
6 minute readSupreme Court Rejects Push to Move Georgia Case Against Ex-Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows
3 minute read3 GOP States Join Paid Sick Leave Movement, Passing Ballot Measures by Wide Margins
5 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250