The Macomb Daily

Libel-defamation case against supervisor dismissed

Judge: Campaign literature statements not malicious, protected by 1st Amendment

- jcook@medianewsg­roup.com By Jameson Cook

A defamation-libel lawsuit by the former Lenox Township supervisor against the current supervisor for statements in campaign literature was thrown out by a Macomb County judge Friday halfway through the trial.

Visiting Judge Antonio Viviano granted a directed-verdict motion in the case that pitted former Lenox supervisor Ron Trombly and his brother, Cameron, against the current Supervisor Anthony Reeder and cohort, Phillip Camarda, for statements by Reeder in political literature. The case was tossed before the eight-person jury heard the defense.

“We’re pleased the court evaluated all of the evidence and was able to resolve the complaint,” said Reeder’s attorney, Grace Crivello.

Viviano ruled the statements were protected political speech.

“The court determined they (plaintiff and attorney) did not meet all of the elements,” Crivello said.

The decision was lambasted by Trombly’s attorney, Paul Cassidy, who said it encourages false statements about politician­s during political campaigns.

“The judge basically pushed back the justice system 200 years,” Cassidy said. “He has made it open season on politician­s.”

Under the ruling, “You can accuse someone of being corrupt and sexually harassing their secretary, with the township paying it (legal bills), accuse someone of a crime as long as it’s during a campaign,” Cassidy said.

Viviano ruled that the defendants did not commit malice, and the statements were protected by the First Amendment.

Cassidy vowed his client, whom he said is “bewildered” by the ruling, will appeal.

“This isn’t even a close call,” he said. “It’s going to come back, and in the end Ron Trombly is going to be vindicated.”

Reeder could not be reached for comment Monday.

Trombly accused Reeder and Camarda, a former township employee and Reeder supporter, of defaming him with several false statements in literature.

Because he was a public figure, Trombly had to prove not only that Reeder made false statements but also that he committed malice — that he knew the statements were false or he displayed reckless disregard for the truth.

The literature was distribute­d in the run-up to the November 2020 election in which Reeder ousted incumbent Trombly by 98 votes, 2,712 to 2,614.

The claim against Reeder involved the claim in campaign literature: “You’ve paid the legal fee’s (sic) for Trombly’s sexual harassment misconduct in office.”

In his claim against Reeder, Trombly could argue for false light, defamation-libel and civil conspiracy. Biernat during the pretrial stage dismissed a claim of intentiona­l infliction of emotional distress.

Trombly was not charged with sexual harassment. The only basis for it was when Camarda was accused of sexual harassment while employed by the township, and Trombly told him he also had been accused of sexual harassment, according to Biernat’s 13-page pretrial opinion. Camarda left his employment at that time.

Biernat removed two claims against the pair on initial review of “libel per se.” Those comments in literature were, “Vote out corruption,” and, “Trombly is rarely in his office, yet receives full pay and benefit from your tax dollars.”

Reeder did not libel his opponent in three other campaign literature statements because he did not commit malice, Biernat previously ruled. Reeder believed the statements were true, Biernat said

But for the trial, the judge left intact claims against Camarda for that and three other statements. He ruled those statements are also protected speech. The other statements included:

• “Trombly promoted his brother to DPW director and assistant fire chief at the same time. “This is blatant nepotism (imagine two pensions paid by you the taxpayer).”

In fact, Cameron Trombly was already the DPW director when his brother took office, and the public safety director recommende­d Cameron Trombly for the assistant fire

Because he was a public figure, Trombly had to prove not only that Reeder made false statements but also that he committed malice — that he knew the statements were false or he displayed reckless disregard for the truth.

chief job.

• “Township debt. 1.5 million (Trombly!).”

Reeder said he later learned the township was $19 million in debt, but that was for bonds for the water and sewer system issued before Trombly took office.

• “Trombly hired a full time city planner for our small township. He has nothing to do yet you’re paying a full salary + benefits. Another example of taxpayer abuse.”

Reeder said he later learned the planner was in a contractua­l position. Trombly said the planner was hired “because they (prior township officials) were not happy with the previous planner,” Biernat says.

 ?? ?? Ron Trombly
Ron Trombly
 ?? ?? Anthony Reeder
Anthony Reeder

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States