NPCA defamation lawsuit heads to trial
Agency and former CAO Carmen D’Angelo suing activist Ed Smith for $ 200,000
Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority’s battles with activist Ed Smith have moved from the court of public opinion to a court of law.
Judge James Ramsay began hearing submissions from lawyers Monday and will ultimately have to sort through the lawsuits and count- lawsuits involving Smith, NPCA, former NPCA CAO Carmen D’Angelo, former NPCA board chairman Bruce Timms and Bill Montgomery, a marketing specialist from Niagara- on- the- Lake.
NPCA and D’Angelo are suing Smith for $ 200,000.
Smith is counter- suing NPCA and Timms for $ 60,000.
Montgomery is suing Smith and two Niagara Region councillors for St. Catharines, Brian Heit and Kelly Edgar, for slander and libel against him and his marketing firms, which include Cornerstone Sponsorship Management and Value Media Corp., for $ 3.5 million.
At one point in Monday’s proceedings, which are being held at the Welland courthouse, Ramsay replied, “Yikes!” as Smith’s lawyer Erin Pleet tried to untangle some of the submissions for the judge.
All the lawsuits stem from a document that was distributed by Smith in 2016 titled A Call for Accountability at the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority.
The 45- page document highlights what is believed to be questionable governance practices with the board and senior management of NPCA.
Included is information about NPCA awarding D’Angelo, through a private company he owns, a $ 41,000 contract for a report on restructuring the agency — while D’Angelo was a member of the board.
Smith’s defamation lawsuit contends a special statement by Timms that was published by NPCA falsely paints him as “a liar and forger and/ or fabricator of documents.”
Both Pleet and Paul DeMelo, the lawyer representing both NPCA and D’Angelo, made submissions Monday.
DeMelo is scheduled to finish his case today. Montgomery, who is representing himself, will then make his presentations. Pleet will wrap it up with her response.
In framing his arguments, DeMelo said NPCA and D’Angelo have a right to protect their reputations and that Smith made a statement that he knew, or ought to have known, was false.
At issue was a profile of D’Angelo used in The Call for Accountability report. The profile of D’Angelo on the website ZoomInfo. com stated D’Angelo was the head of a company called DPM Consulting and that DPM Consulting was based out of Australia. D’Angelo is neither the head of a company in Australia and he did not create the profile on ZoomerInfo. com.
DeMelo said that Smith, with a little research, should have been able to ascertain that the information on the website was false and Smith was “reckless or wilfully blind” in asking if D’Angelo’s company could even conduct business in Ontario.
DeMelo said the report went on to accuse D’Angelo of conflicts of interest, not paying taxes and contract swapping.
“There is no basis for that,” DeMelo said. “No evidence of that.”
When Ramsay questioned whether NPCA had the right to sue Smith, DeMelo had the unenviable task to trying to explain to Ramsay why he doesn’t think NPCA is a government entity — even though it receives much of its funding from the tax levy and implements and oversees government legislation.
Pleet’s submissions were that citizens such as Smith have a duty to hold government to account, and that right needs to be protected and outweighs the financial interests of those involved with government agencies.
She argued that neither NPCA, D’Angelo nor Montgomery had shown they have suffered any monetary damages from Smith’s report and Smith was right to have serious concerns about the transparency of NPCA and the contracts with Montgomery and D’Angelo. bsawchuk@ postmedia. com twitter. com/ Bill_ Standard