Judge rules in sheriff’s contempt suit

A special judge in 11th District West Circuit Court denied Jefferson County Sheriff Lafayette Woods’ petition for contempt in a lawsuit claiming Jefferson County Judge Gerald Robinson inadequately funded operations out of the 2022 county budget but found Robinson acted arbitrarily and capriciously in rejecting 93 out of more than 2,000 budget claims since June 13 of that year.

Retired Saline County Circuit Judge Gary Arnold, who heard the matter because local judges recused themselves, issued findings and conclusions in the case Woods filed against Robinson and all 13 justices of the peace, who make up the Quorum Court. Woods accused Robinson and the Quorum Court of arbitrarily and capriciously denying or disallowing 93 claims, one of which was for a $184,429 payment to Sysco food systems that Robinson’s chief of staff testified in September was $37,000 short. Sysco supplies food to the Jefferson County youth and adult detention centers.

“We are pleased with the Court’s ruling denying the Sheriff’s claims,” defense attorney Casey Castleberry said in a statement. “The Court recognized that the County Judge has a duty to ensure that all county funds are spent in accordance with the budget approved by the Quorum Court.”

Castleberry represented all justices except for Alfred Carroll Sr., according to court documents.

A message seeking comment was left for the plaintiff’s attorney, Kimberly Dale, at her office.

Upon filing the initial complaint on March 21, 2022, Woods sought declaratory relief and a writ of mandamus, or an order to a government official to properly fulfill duties, that would compel the Quorum Court to appropriate additional funds to the sheriff’s department. Woods amended that petition for a preliminary injunction three times: first in May 2022; secondly for a ruling that a job requisition/pre-offer form for use by county officials was invalid because he argued a related ordinance was not properly adopted and unconstitutional; and thirdly in January of this year because of the now-proven allegations of arbitrary and capricious denial of claims.

Arnold also dismissed all claims in the original and first amended petition. He found the Circuit Court had no jurisdiction to grant a writ of mandamus and the claims regarding the 2022 county budget were moot because the fiscal year had passed.

It was established during testimony some of the denied claims were resubmitted and approved for payment.

“No other department in Jefferson County government was subject to similar inconsistent denial of submitted claims,” according to the findings.

At the start of a hearing on Sept. 14, Arnold granted a partial summary judgment finding the minutes from a March 2021 Quorum Court meeting did not reflect the 13-justice body suspended the rules to read an ordinance fully on three different days, therefore rendering the ordinance invalid.

“The only claim not dismissed was the one we would agree to because there was an issue with the reading,” Castleberry said.

Wednesday’s ruling revealed there was no legal requirement for a county judge to explain the reason for denying a claim, although Robinson testified in September the claims were not processed due to missteps in coding and due to a request for funds from the wrong line item of the budget. That request was for food for inmates, and it was placed under ‘Radio Fund,’ according to the testimony.

“The County Judge’s review of claims and his decision as to whether to approve or deny those claims are discretionary acts,” Arnold wrote in his findings. “In performing his statutory duties to ensure that county funds are expended in accordance with the budget promulgated by the Quorum Court, the County Judge is called upon to exercise his discretion and his official judgment. As such, mandamus doesn’t lie, and Petitioner’s claim for a writ of mandamus is denied.”

Woods asked the Circuit Court to limit Robinson’s review of claims in the future by denying only those where fraud or an issue with procurement is evident, but Arnold ruled that is not consistent with Robinson’s duties under the law and his statutory authority cannot be constrained.

Arnold found Robinson’s denials were arbitrary and capricious, but any declaratory judgment would operate to control the action of the state.

“To avoid the application of sovereign immunity, Petitioner urged that the County Judge’s actions were arbitrary and capricious, which is an exception to the defense of sovereign immunity,” according to the conclusions.

“Judge Robinson will continue to act as a responsible steward of the taxpayers’ money and require that all expenditures are made in strict compliance with the budget,” Castleberry stated.

Arnold did warn the basis for denying any claim must be clearly stated so Woods can correct the deficiency and avoid similar problems going forward.

“The Sheriff and the County Judge, or their respective department representatives, shall promptly confer concerning denied claims to ensure timely resolution for the benefit of effective and efficient county government operations,” Arnold wrote.