Apr 15, 2003 By Paul Sunyak 4 min read

A federal appeals court has affirmed a lower court ruling that rejected appeals from both sides in a wrongful termination civil lawsuit filed by Donald Whittaker against Fayette County Sheriff Gary D. Brownfield. Whittaker, whom Brownfield fired as a sheriff’s office sergeant the day he took office in January 2000, won a judgment of nearly $140,000 in a March 2002 federal jury verdict. Whittaker was awarded $28,632 in back pay, $108,237 in front pay and $2,500 in compensatory damages.

However, Whittaker did not receive punitive damages in the initial verdict and his appeal centered on how the court defined the terms “reckless and callous” for the jury in that regard. Whittaker’s attorney, Anthony G. Sanchez of Pittsburgh, said Whittaker wanted additional punitive damages because, “We wanted to send a lesson. We felt this behavior was very improper.”

However, Judge William L. Standish of the U.S. District Court for Western Pennsylvania turned down Whittaker’s appeal – a decision affirmed April 9 by the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia.

That appeals court also upheld Standish’s denial of an appeal filed by Brownfield and Fayette County, which was also named as a defendant in the suit brought by Whittaker. The defendants’ appeal centered on two issues: whether the District Court erred in permitting testimony from fired chief deputy sheriff Mark Santore, and whether the record was sufficient to support the jury verdict in favor of Whittaker.

Jonathan Dryer, the insurance company attorney that represented Brownfield and Fayette County in the Whittaker case, was out of his office Monday and could not be reached for comment.

Brownfield said he just received notice of the appeal court decision and isn’t sure what the next step might be, if any. “I don’t know. I just got the paperwork, too. It says that we have 14 days to appeal this,” said Brownfield, who had no further comment on the matter other than attorney Dryer was “the one that they gave me.”

Sanchez, however, said that since this is a civil rights case, the loser is obligated to pay the winner’s attorney fees and costs – which in this case tacks another $123,000 onto the $139,369 won by Whittaker, a sum that doesn’t include court-determined interest on that money while the case is under appeal.

“My attorneys fees and costs are going to be $123,000. You’re looking at a quarter of a million dollars for Whittaker alone,” said Sanchez. “When they appeal and I prevail, my fees are also paid for that (work). By continuing to fight this losing battle, they’re continuing to incur (more) debt by paying me.”

Sanchez also represents Santore, whom he said won a similar case when the Pittsburgh-based federal District Court granted a motion of summary judgment, a rare occurrence. While that move still would have required a trial to determine damages for Santore, Sanchez said the attorney handling that case on Brownfield’s behalf has appealed the lower court’s summary judgment decision to the Third Circuit Court. The Santore and Whittaker cases are separate.

In its April 9 ruling concerning the Whittaker case, the three-judge Circuit Court panel basically agreed with Standish’s prior rulings that turned down both sides’ appeals. The 12-page ruling notes that shortly after Brownfield won a five-way Democrat primary for sheriff in 1999, John Mongell asked him if he would “clean house” after taking office, and Brownfield responded that he would fire Whittaker because of poor work behavior and would fire Santore because his mother, former Sheriff Norma Jean Santore, did not back Brownfield in the election.

Upon taking office Jan. 3, 2000, Brownfield fired both men, telling Mark Santore he was terminated because “his mother chose this path for (him), that is she would have supported (Brownfield) instead of (Mark Santore),” he would have kept the son in the office. Brownfield told Whittaker that he wanted “to surround (himself) with people (he) felt comfortable with” and that he had made “political promises,” according to the ruling.

Brownfield replaced Mark Santore as chief deputy with political supporter Larry Goldberg, who had campaigned for Brownfield and had been promised the position of chief deputy upon Brownfield’s election, said the court document. Brownfield also told Whittaker that, “You can be assured that if anyone asks me, I’ll tell them it (Whittaker’s firing) was for political reasons” – a statement that Brownfield does not deny making, noted the ruling.

Brownfield later hired Anthony Bartock and Lud Muccioli and four other individuals, all of whom were his political supporters, according to the ruling.

On appeal, both sides were seeking either a judgment in their favor or a new trial. The Third Circuit panel sided with Standish’s prior denial of both sides’ post-trial motions. Sanchez said the next step in the appeal process would be the U.S. Supreme Court.