PORTER WINS $400,000 JUDGMENT

   Manchester uncertain how much welfare department decision will cost taxpayers.

By:  Michael Cousineau
 Union Leader Staff

            Michael Porter, who claimed he was forced to quit his job in Manchester’s Welfare Department after complaining publicly about his boss, won a $400,000 judgment yesterday against the city and former Welfare Commissioner Susan Lafond.

            A Hillsborough County Superior Court jury ordered the city and Lafond to pay Porter a combined $100,000 in compensatory damages and for Lafond to pay $300,000 in punitive damages.

            “Mr. Porter was very happy, not so much in terms of the money, but in feeling vindicated,” said Porter’s attorney, Jon Meyer.

            The lawyer who handled the case said he will ask Judge Robert Lynn to set aside the verdict on legal issues.   Late in the case, Porter raised an issue of civil rights violations, said lawyer Michael O’Shaughnessy.

            And if Porter was harmed because of employment, the case should be a workers compensation claim, he said.

            It wasn’t known yesterday how much taxpayers will be on the hook for the settlement.

            The city has a longstanding policy to pay court judgments on behalf of employees as long as they were acting within the scope of their duties, said City Solicitor, Tom Clark.

            But O’Shaughnessy said punitive damages are almost never awarded against a city official, and it’s not clear that the city will have to pay them.

            “It depends on the ruling,” he said.

            Porter, who now works as an investigator at the Manchester public defender’s office, wasn’t available for comment, but Meyer said Porter has no plans to return to the Welfare Department.

            “He just couldn’t go back after what happened,” Meyer said.

            Porter had spoken out publicly about concerns he had about how Lafond was running the Welfare Department.  He had accused her of refusing to let case workers report to police any threats by welfare recipients against third parties and of strongly discouraging case workers from investigating or reporting welfare fraud.

            Meyer said his client was a whistle-blower who got punished for speaking out.

            “That the message we wanted the jury to give, not just for people in this case but more generally, is it’s important for people who work in public employment and have the courage to speak out on subjects of public concern be protected from retaliation,” Meyer said.

            Reached at home, Lafond declined to discuss the verdict.  “I can’t talk to you,” she said.

            Last year, Mayor Robert Baines barred Lafond, an elected official, from returning to her office after a four-month absence and told her she must work out of an office in the west wing of City Hall.   Aldermen approved a vote of no confidence in Baines for his handling of issues regarding Lafond.

            “The city went to extraordinary lengths to deal with that situation,” Baines said.  “Obviously, the jury determined the conditions we were trying to address did exist, so I’m not surprised at all” by the verdict.

            Lafond lost her reelection bid in the September 2001 primary.

            Those testifying at the trial included Baines, Lafond, former Human Resources Director Mark Hobson and several Welfare Department employees, Meyer said.

            The trial lasted nine days spread over three weeks.

            “It was a very emotional trial for everybody,” Meyer said.

            In court papers, Porter alleged that Lafond’s actions “have caused him extreme emotional distress” and makes “it impossible for him to return to work.”

            Porter also said Lafond tried to fire him, but the mayor blocked her attempt.  Porter alleged that Lafond also attempted to force Porter to resign by engaging in repeated acts of hostility against him, including denying him a merit pay raise.

            The city’s security manager, Ronald Robidas, investigated the department.  “Beyond Ms. Lafond’s intimidation and management styles, employees openly discussed fear for their personal safety,” Robidas concluded.

            In recent years, both Lafond and Porter went on separate medical leaves.  Porter said he went on leave in 2001 “as a partial result of Lafond’s hostility and vindictiveness towards him.”

            Clark said O’Shaughnessy was selected by the city’s third-party administrator, Northern General Services, to try the case.

            Meanwhile, Lafond has a lawsuit against the city pending in U.S. District Court in Concord.  Lafond is suing the city for locking her out of her office and threatening her with arrest early last year.

            She claims the action deprived her of due process rights, humiliated her and damaged her reputation.