FOIA Lawsuit: Chronology of Events
by Steve Harry                                               
      Home
 
1/4/05 I send a Freedom of Information request to MERS asking for copies of any signed, written agreements made between MERS and following former MERS employees upon their termination:

            Brian Himick
            Chris Neff
            Marian Frane
            Diane Anderson
            Gale Larson
            Shirley Roe

My suspicion is that when MERS wants to get rid of someone without "just cause" and without going through all the "progressive discipline" steps, they just pay them off and have them sign a confidentiality agreement.
 

1/31/05 MERS deputy general counsel Tom Petroni denies my FOIA request. He points out that no one named Diane Anderson ever worked for MERS (I got the name wrong). As for the others, he says:

Without admitting or denying that any of the named individuals were "terminated," to the extent MERS may have entered into any "agreements" with these individuals, it would have been with MERS' promise of strict confidentiality. Further, MERS lacks discretion to release confidential information regarding private persons no longer employed by the system. See MCL 15.243(1)(a) (stating that a public body may exempt from disclosure information of a personal nature where disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of an individual's privacy).

2/2/05 I send an appeal to the MERS Board:

[Mr. Petroni]  gave two reasons for denying me copies of the termination agreements .... One is that the agreements were entered with MERS’ promise of strict confidentiality. I contend that if the information in those agreements would otherwise be available to the public under the Freedom of Information Act, the agreements were void. The agreements would be considered a conspiracy to subvert the Freedom of Information Act.

His second reason was that “MERS lacks discretion to release confidential information regarding private persons no longer employed by the system,” but he cites MCL 15.243(1)(a), which does not say that at all. It says “Information of a personal nature if public disclosure of the information would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of an individual's privacy” may be exempt from disclosure. There is no exemption for “confidential information regarding private persons no longer employed by the system”.

I am not interested in the reason these employees were terminated. I want only to know the terms of the agreements. If there is anything in the agreements regarding work performance or disciplinary matters, it may be blacked out. Even the names of the employees may be blacked out. I want to know only what was promised by MERS and what was promised by the employees.

3/5/05 I send this email to several of the MERS board members (only 6 of the board members were identified on the MERS website at that time):

On the agenda for this week's meeting is my appeal of MERS' denial of a FOIA request for copies of the termination agreements for several former MERS employees. Before you make your decision, please insist on examining each of the agreements. I suspect that if there is anything sensitive or embarassing in the agreements, it is MERS, not the employee, who is likely to be embarassed. 

3/23/05 I receive a letter saying the Board has denied my request for information. This is from the March 8-9 board meeting minutes:

Mr. D. Murphy moved to deny Mr. Steve Harry’s appeal on his FOIA request for information from the personnel files of individuals no longer working at MERS, for the reasons stated in the Designated FOIA Coordinator’s January 31, 2005 letter. Supported by Mr. G. Murphy. Motion carried.

 

4/8/05 I initiate a lawsuit in Ingham County Circuit Court asking the court to order MERS to disclose termination agreements signed by several former employees.  I ask the court to award costs, attorney fees and $500 in punitive damages, as provided by the Freedom of Information Act. 
 
5/11/05 My attorney Jim Starr receives a call from Lisa Ward, the attorney MERS earlier contracted to pursue legal action against me for the mersdirt.com website.  She tells him MERS will give me the termination agreements if I promise not to publish them. She said MERS will also pay my attorney fees - but not the $500 penalty for wrongfully denying the FOIA request.  I reject the offer.
 
6/6/05 MERS sends my attorney copies of the termination agreements for 3 former employees. In her cover letter, attorney Lisa Ward says that "all relevant documents" are enclosed. I had also expected one for Shirley Roe, who was fired without warning or explanation at the end of August, 2004. Shirley had a lawyer and was negotiating with MERS.
 
6/8/05 To make sure that none of the requested agreements were overlooked, my attorney sends a letter offering to settle the lawsuit if MERS pays my attorney fees ($1456.20) and provides a signed statement from CEO Anne Wagner that there are no other agreements.
 
6/20/05 Lisa Ward replies saying that although there were no termination agreements for Diane Anderson or Gale Larsen, "the situation with Ms. Roe has not yet been finalized."
 
6/25/05 I add a new page to the mersdirt.com website regarding the termination agreements. It includes links to the agreements along with my opinion on the matter.
 
7/22/05 MERS files a counterclaim to my FOIA lawsuit that is completely unrelated to my FOIA request. It claims that the mersdirt.com website has damaged MERS and its CEO and it charges me with defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress. It asks for a retraction, compensatory damages, etc.
 
7/22/05 My attorney files a motion for summary disposition along with a brief in support of that motion. He argues that the counterclaim fails to state the language relied upon to claim defamation, as is required for a defamation complaint. He also says that a public agency is incapable of experiencing emotional distress.
 
9/7/05 MERS files a response to the motion for summary disposition which includes an affidavit by CEO Anne Wagner in which she says I accused her on this website of making "illegal" payoffs to 3 former employees. I never used that word. This is what I said:

There is no mention of severance pay in the MERS personnel manual. The chief executive officer has no authority make payments to employees other than as compensation for time worked and for reimbursement of work expenses.

Also:

If these terminations had really been voluntary, there would have been no need for payoffs. Nor would payoffs be required if proper procedure had been followed to establish that the employee had not performed satisfactorily. These employees were bullied into resigning and then paid not to put up a fight about it. It saved the CEO from having to justify her action, and it cost her nothing. It wasn't her money. The employees were paid off with public funds - money contributed by municipalities for paymIent of their employees' pensions.

9/14/05 At a hearing at the Ingham County courthouse in Mason, circuit court judge William Collette grants my request for summary disposition, saying that MERS' request for a retraction, compensatory damages, etc., should be brought as a separate action rather than a counterclaim to my FOIA lawsuit, and should be brought by the injured individual rather than MERS, since a corporation cannot experience emotional distress.

After the hearing, MERS' attorney gives my attorney a $500 check for the statutory punitive damages.
 

9/15/05 My attorney submits a Proposed Judgment to Judge William Collette. The order says that MERS shall:
  • supply any termination agreements not previously supplied, or an affidavit that all agreements have already been supplied
  • reimburse me for costs and attorney fees for maintaining this action
9/22/05 MERS files an Objection to Plaintiff's Proposed Judgment. Since the Court at the hearing did not order MERS to supply an affidavit and an affidavit is not required under FOIA, MERS sees no need to supply one. MERS also objects to paying any costs and attorney fees beyond the $1,456.20, the amount incurred before MERS filed its counterclaim. MERS requests a 7 day abeyance "so that the parties can attempt to resolve the matter."
 
9/26/05 My attorney files a Motion to Settle Judgment in which he questions MERS' objection to supplying the affidavit. He also says the statute mandates payment of reasonable attorney fees, but that the time to discuss the amount is after  the judgment has been entered. A hearing is scheduled for 9:00 AM on October 26 at the courthouse in Mason.
 
10/25/05 Lisa Ward faxes a proposed order to my attorney. In her cover letter, she says she hopes to avoid wasting the Court's time. However, she sends it 4:16 pm and Jim has already left the office.
 
10/26/05 Outside the court room just before the scheduled hearing, Lisa Ward and Jim Starr compare proposed orders. Jim has dropped his demand for an affidavit from Anne Wagner stating that all termination agreements have been supplied. Lisa agrees to go with Jim's order with one change: The word "reasonable" is inserted in the statement regarding attorney fees.

Judge Collette signs the judgment. It says that MERS must supply any termination agreements not previously supplied and reimburse me for reasonable costs and attorney fees. It approves the payment of $500 in punitive damages, which I have already received. And it dismisses without prejudice MERS' counterclaim for defamation and intentional infliction of mental suffering.

Later that day, Mr. Starr sends Ms. Ward a letter along with an itemized statement of charges related to the FOIA lawsuit. The total bill: $6426.20. In his letter, he says that if MERS disputes the amount, we will go to court again and more charges will be added.
 

11/18/05 MERS delivers a letter and a check for $6426.20 to my attorney.