11/02/2006

Three found guilty of defaming supervisor

By PATRICK SULLIVAN

psullivan@record-eagle.com

LELAND — Three Elmwood Township residents engaged in a bitter political dispute with the township supervisor must pay their adversary tens of thousands of dollars, fund her next campaign and make a public apology.

A jury in Leelanau County decided that former Elmwood Township trustee John Stanek, former Township Supervisor Noel Flohe and resident Donald Barrows must pay a combined $107,000 to current Township Supervisor Derith Smith, including $12,000 to pay for her 2008 campaign.

Each defendant also must publish an apology to Smith within 10 business days in the form of legal notices in the Record-Eagle and the Leelanau Enterprise, jurors ordered after a five-day trial in 13th Circuit Court that concluded Wednesday evening.

"I was so impressed with the jury, they were so deliberate and careful,” Smith said. "When you have a discussion about your government, you should definitely be able to criticize government, but criticism and lying are two different things.”

Smith said she hopes the verdict in the defamation suit can signal a move to more civility in township politics.

Barrows referred a question about whether he would appeal to his attorney, who could not be reached for comment. Asked to comment about the case, Barrows said "you got screwed today as a member” of the press.

Asked to elaborate, he said "check out the ruling and see how it applies to you” before he hung up.

Grant Parsons, Smith's attorney, said a portion of the defense in the case argued that the defendants' speech in anti-Smith mailings was protected by the First Amendment. There is no First Amendment protection for known false speech, however.

Flohe and Stanek could not be reached for comment.

"This is a great verdict,” Parsons said. "The money's neat and all that stuff, but undoing the damage done and making the defendants make a public apology is just fabulous.”

Parsons said he will file a motion to enforce the judgment in anticipation of an appeal from the defendants.

Smith filed suit in July 2005. Her case stemmed from an anonymous mailing to township residents during Smith's successful 2004 run to replace Flohe as supervisor. Stanek also lost his seat in that election.

The mailing included a disciplinary report alleging wrongdoing during Smith's tenure as Suttons Bay village clerk, allegations that were deemed unfounded.

Parsons said the defendants knew the allegations were false when they sent the mailing to residents.

He said the jury asked a lot of questions and for a calendar so they could study the timeline of the mailing in an effort to discover who knew what and when.

"You can't accuse somebody of something illegal that they know is a false allegation,” Parsons said. "It was a really cowardly lie; they weren't even willing to sign it.”

Flohe's tenure as supervisor was marked with strife, with political opponents and a protracted lawsuit over a controversial development that saw the township forced to pay tens of thousands of dollars in attorney fees after the state appeals court found the township had ignored a court order in a lawsuit with a citizens' group.

The jury ordered each defendant to pay Smith $4,000 in campaign expenses and ordered Barrows to pay $45,000, Flohe to pay $10,000 and Stanek to pay $40,000 in non-economic damages to Smith.