In public statements made to the mainstream media about the lawsuit that I recently filed against him Jim Ireton has repeatedly said that the City will have to pay for an attorney to defend him. As a resident and taxpayer of Salisbury, at the next meeting of the City Council, I plan to ask the City Attorney, Mark Tilghman, whether he agrees with me that the City is not required to pay for Mr. Ireton’s attorney.
You see, the Maryland Code provides that “a municipal corporation shall provide a defense” for an official only for “an act arising within the scope of the official’s employment or authority.”
The acts that are the subject of my suit were made by Mr. Ireton in his personal capacity and not as part of his capacity as mayor. And my suit is against him, and not against the City, which is not required to pay anything, including his legal fees, because of my lawsuit.
If Mark Tilghman agrees with my view, then I will demand that Mr. Ireton stop stating that my lawsuit against him will cost the City to provide for his defense and apologize on PAC 14 and in Salisbury’s mainstream media for saying so.
Here’s the Maryland Code provision:
COURTS AND JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS Code Ann. § 5-507 (2012)
§ 5-507. Immunity -- Municipal corporations and officers
(a) Contract actions. -- In an action in contract described under Article 23A, § 1A of the Code, a municipal corporation, or its officer, department, agency, board, commission, or other unit of government, is not liable for punitive damages.
(b) Nonliability of officials generally; torts involving motor vehicles. --
(1) An official of a municipal corporation, while acting in a discretionary capacity, without malice, and within the scope of the official's employment or authority shall be immune as an official or individual from any civil liability for the performance of the action.
(2) An official of a municipal corporation is not immune from liability for negligence or any other tort arising from the operation of a motor vehicle except as to any claim for damages in excess of the limits of any applicable policy of motor vehicle liability insurance.
(3) (i) Subject to subparagraph (ii) of this paragraph, a municipal corporation shall provide a defense for an official of the municipal corporation for any act arising within the scope of the official's employment or authority.
(ii) A municipal corporation shall only provide a defense for an official of the municipal corporation for negligence or any other tort arising from the operation of a motor vehicle as to any claim for damages in excess of the limits of any applicable policy of motor vehicle liability insurance.
HISTORY: 1990, ch. 546, § 3; 1997, ch. 14, § 9.
Posted at 8:00 AM
Of course the taxpayers should not be liable for his personal actions he did on his own time. Just because he called a press conference at city hall doesn't make it mayoral business!
ReplyDeleteDid you expect any less from that bozo?
ReplyDeleteHe's going to throw everything against the wall to see what sticks.
This is standard m.o. for libtard democrats.
But hey, we voted for him and his ilk.
Now if people would take their collective heads outa their arses, vote these scum out of office.
Cannot deny you are doing your homework. Good point. These bullies started something, will get their just due and not at the taxpayers expense
ReplyDeleteJOE,In my limited time of 40 years with the MD. and County service in corrections I was part of several inmate lawsuits by inmates.Each time I and several other co's were removed because we did our jobs correctly.However nearing the end of my career things were changing.The lawsuits were being directed to the individuals and not their offical capacity.Look at what happened to the Somerset County Sheriff lawsuit.The angencies are not responsible for legal fees anyway shape or form.The good old boy system is fading.
ReplyDeleteI've said it all along that the tax payers do not have to pay for Jim Ireton's defense attorney.
ReplyDeleteDoes the tax payers have have to pay for Jim Ireton's grocery bill?
I know you are sueing him, but can you explain exactly what you are sueing him for?
ReplyDeleteThese deal with contract law and motor torts. Do the apply to this situation?
ReplyDeleteHe or Salisbury will not need to pay a lawyer as I will represent him pro bono. I cannot wait to see the looks on the Judge/Jury faces when they hear this law suit is because Ireton called you a Delaware blogger, several times? With the problems of the city, county, state, nation and world - your greatest concern is who is footing Ireton's bill over something so asinine as your suitcase? Jeeez Deleware blogger, get a life.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to know how come any of them are "immune".
ReplyDeleteIreton is a disgrace to those who voted for him -- never again, Jimmieboy
ReplyDeleteNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
ReplyDeleteAs a teacher and now a politician , Ireton is use to public paying for all his BS .
ReplyDeleteWhat an idiot.
The answer in NO-the city should not pay a penny toward this suit. You are not suing the city, for something that occured in the capactiy of the mayor's duties, nor is the City even a party to the suit.
ReplyDeleteNow that being said I don't belive it was appropriate for the PD to have involved themselves in the phone call either. If the mayor wanted to clear his name as he claims it should have been done on his own dime as their was nothing criminal about the phone call.
At the very minimum he should be made to pay for the subpoenaed phone records.
From what I understand you have offered to drop the suit if he recognizes your a Maryland resident. If he's seen your drivers license and he continues to spread a lie you should have the right to sue him. Your both potential candidates and I will never vote for a liar. If our mayor lies I don't care what capacity he's in, your case is legit and the city is insured.
ReplyDeleteanonymous 8:58, I filed the lawsuit because Jim Ireton has seen my Maryland Driver's License and has held it in his own hands. Jim knowingly and willingly lied to the VOTERS of Salisbury and has implied I am not a resident. He was served the lawsuit hours before the radio interview that aired Friday and STILL went on to defame me by calling me a Delaware Blogger and even in the end of the interview he flat out said I was not even a resident of Salisbury.
ReplyDeleteI, (like many of you) are sick and tired of politicians who LIE. I will fight back, (as I always have) to defend ALL of us who have been attacked by Salisbury Mayor's. Funny, it was OK for them to sue me but for some its not OK for me to sue them. In former lawsuits each Judge respected the fact that I did not counter sue. I have offered the Mayor the opportunity to go public and admit I am a resident of Maryland. IF Mayor Ireton refuses to do so I can assure you I will follow this lawsuit the whole way through and I will win.
Public Officials should be held to higher standards. Lying to the public for your own personal gain is just wrong.
"Maryland Lawyer said...
ReplyDeleteHe or Salisbury will not need to pay a lawyer as I will represent him pro bono. I cannot wait to see the looks on the Judge/Jury faces when they hear this law suit is because Ireton called you a Delaware blogger, several times? With the problems of the city, county, state, nation and world - your greatest concern is who is footing Ireton's bill over something so asinine as your suitcase? Jeeez Deleware blogger, get a life.
July 1, 2012 9:40 AM"
We all will wait for you to enter your appearance on Mon then,
9:40 Maryland Lawyer. I am sure Mayor Ireton will be pleased to hear you have offered to represent him "pro bono."
If I were Ireton though, I would have hestitancy in accepting your offer.
Your comment screams-"Free advice is worth what you pay for it" considering a first year law student knows "lawsuit" is one word.
Maryland Lawyer:
ReplyDeleteYou are a fraud -- if you represent him, your name would be in the case record, so why didn't you disclose it in your comment -- no answer needed.
Joe:
Please put this post at the top for today.
Why shouldn't the City pay Jim's expenses? It pays for Laura Mitchell's travel and entertainment, doesn't it?
ReplyDeleteSeconfd that -- this post should be at the top of the blog today
ReplyDeleteI think Jimmy's new name will be
ReplyDelete"Rehoboth Flogger"...
Not only should the tax payers not pay for this lawsuit, if the city attorney attempts to assert himself as Jim's defense he should be immediately fired.
ReplyDeleteNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
ReplyDeleteIreton needs to be sued-----Many will believe his false accusations-- that you aren't a resident of MD & are going to "run against him---for Mayor." The air definately needs to be Cleared on that for those who don't come to this blogg site!
ReplyDeletemd lawyer is a liar. you go joe, make ireton pay his own bills
ReplyDeleteJoe should get an award for breaking the biggest scandal story in a decade.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 6:26, Try the biggest scandal in the history of the city! This could sink Salisbury to the bottom and create class warfare on the streets! Never since the founding of this city have there been events of this much importance happening in the city!
ReplyDelete"I cannot wait to see the looks on the Judge/Jury faces when they hear this law suit is because Ireton called you a Delaware blogger".
ReplyDeleteYou and perhaps others miss the most important point which is understandable considering how liberal influenced education has deteriorated so much. Even Delaware education progressives want to teach and promote Unions to our kid's young minds. Is that "programming" or what? We should not have a Mayor spouting opinionated data about a citizen.
Ireton used his official capacity as Mayor to discredit a citizen's credentials who is launching a run against him as Mayor. Sure, Ireton can preface his comments with "my personal opinion" but he does not. This is an opinionated blog.The Office of Mayor is NOT. In fact, at some time during the resolution of this suit, the Council is going to have express a stand as to whether Ireton's reported slander represents the opinion of the governing body of Salisbury or just Ireton himself.
No the city should not pay for his legal expenses. He is the one making the statement and he was not making the statement on behalf of the city.
ReplyDeleteDepends: If he really had nothing to do with the incident, the city should protect the mayor against false charges. If he had ANYTHING at all to do with the harassing phone call, he should be immediately removed from office and be totally responsible the legal fees and legal consequences of his actions.
ReplyDeleteI have no problem with any man being gay even though it is immoral and possible a mental problem. I'm ok with don't ask don't tell, but Jim Ireton is now dropping the gay "card" just like insecure minorities drop the race card.
ReplyDeleteGet a life Jim Liarton and better yet pack your bags and move to that beach in Delaware.
Are you a "Tea Partier?"
ReplyDeleteHe says that like it's a bad thing?
I would rather be a Tea Partier than an Obamabot!
Any way to get that interview as an Mpeg or mp3 file?
ReplyDeleteThomas E. Claybaugh, 53, will assume the position of general manager/regional vice president-sales of the Gannett Co. Inc. properties in southern Delaware, Maryland and Virginia's Eastern Shore. His appointment is effective today. Claybaugh will be in charge of the consolidated operation and overall management of the group.
ReplyDeleteSalisbury is a JOKE! Who in their right mind would want to any part of it! Life is too short for all this nonsense. No wonder we are becoming a NANNY State! Going to court over he said she said! Laughable
ReplyDeleteThis situation is a complete embarrassment. Myself and many other city employees cannot wait to get out! The sad part is that it will never happen with the fearless leader we have in office right now. No one wants to move business into Salisbury so that means the job market will not improve.
ReplyDeleteWell, if i were you Joe, I would find out if this guy sides wit you or not and then demand that in writing either way...
ReplyDeleteBecause again mark my words: The city will pay the fees for the mayor... watch...
Joe, my question to you is...if elected, how will you be able to continue this blog since you air so many opinions, etc. there is no way your posters will remain objective to the issues and this could create an issue for you.
ReplyDeleteI think you need to do one or the other as you won't have time to do both well.
Joe, grow up and stop this childish game. With all the things you say on this blog then you get upset when someone says something about you.
ReplyDeleteYou said in your interview that what has you upset the most is that he called you a Delaware Blogger and says your not a Salisbury Resident.
Half the people that look at your blog dont think Obama is a citizen. Really? Shoes on the other foot... Cry about it
6:16 tea partyier vs tea bagger like liarton?
ReplyDeleteJim told me that the only reason he was just the mayor was because Salisbury does not elect Kings.
ReplyDelete4:48 =
ReplyDeleteDon't you mean QUEENS?
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteJoe, grow up and stop this childish game. With all the things you say on this blog then you get upset when someone says something about you.
You said in your interview that what has you upset the most is that he called you a Delaware Blogger and says your not a Salisbury Resident.
Half the people that look at your blog dont think Obama is a citizen. Really? Shoes on the other foot... Cry about it
July 2, 2012 8:42 AM
So you are trying to say Obama is a citizen? I bet you can't prove it. What an idiot!! You should have signed your name so we all would know who this idiot is. LMAO