RIVERSIDE COUNTY: Sheriff’s union seeks retrial in whistle-blower case

May 24, 2013 07:49 PM PDT May 24, 2013 07:49 PM PDT RIVERSIDE COUNTY: Sheriff's union seeks retrial in whistle-blower case RIVERSIDE COUNTY: Sheriff's union seeks retrial in whistle-blower case FRANK BELLINO/STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER Scott Teutscher, 55 from Temecula Attorney. A Text Size WEBLINK PE: Whistle-blower seeks $1.99 million, and his job back (May 14, 2013) The Riverside Sheriff's Association wants a new trial in the federal whistle-blower lawsuit won by a former official of the law enforcement union who was dismissed in 2005 after complaining about legal fees spent to defend a deputy accused of vandalism. Jurors voted in April to award Scott Teutscher, 55, of Temecula Attorney, $814,750, including $357,500 in punitive damages. The Riverside Sheriff's Association's attorneys argued in their May 20 papers that evidence did not support the jury's verdict and asked that it be overturned. The union said a new trial was warranted because the previous one kept it from presenting evidence that could have limited Teutscher's economic damage claims; that there was insufficient evidence to support Teutscher's economic damage claims; and that judicial errors allowed reference during the trial about events and exhibits that were supposed to have been excluded. The last matter, attorney Jon Y. Vanderpool argued, "denied RSA a fair trial and motivated the jury to decide the case hastily and based on passion and prejudice." The association's attorneys also argued that evidence did not support the jury's verdict, and it should be overturned. Teutscher believed that the Sheriff's Association's Legal Defense Trust unlawfully spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on a former deputy's legal bills that were unrelated to his law-enforcement job. Teutscher reported it to authorities and was later fired by the association. The association said Teutscher was fired for other reasons and that its officials were not aware at the time that he had contacted investigators with his allegations. But U.S. District Judge Robert Whaley concluded earlier this month that Teutscher's dismissal was in retaliation for reporting his complaints to outside agencies. Whaley also agreed the legal defense fund money had been misused, violating terms of the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. That opened the way for Teutscher to seek an additional more than $1.99 million in back wages, attorney fees and other costs. He also wants to be reinstated. Vanderpool argued that Whaley should have allowed jurors to hear the union's allegations that it had discovered misconduct by Teutscher after he was dismissed as its legal operations manager. He said Teutscher's memory was improperly refreshed during testimony about his income in the years after his dismissal from the union, and that the evidence of future lost earnings was speculative. Vanderpool also focused on the introduction during the trial of the word "forgery" through "argumentative commentary" by Teutscher attorney Daniel P. Stevens. "The aura of 'a forgery' laid the groundwork for the jury's accepting plaintiff's many dubious assertions," Vanderpool wrote. He focused on Teutscher's assertion that the defendants faked a 2003 email to make it look as though Teutscher had actually approved the legal funding for the former deputy that he later reported as suspicious to outside authorities. "Plaintiff's repetition of the 'forgery' theme…was manifestly unfair to RSA. For the remainder of the trial, the jury was predisposed to believe allegations of forgery without discerning corroborative or impeaching evidence," Vanderpool wrote. The association's motion for a new trial, and Teutscher's request for additional awards and reinstatement, are under submission to Whaley. Latest Headlines
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.pe.com/local-news/riverside-county/riverside/riverside-headlines-index/20130524-riverside-county-sheriffs-union-seeks-retrial-in-whistle-blower-case.ece