Doerr asks judge to toss lawsuit
The lawyer for a Butler County Common Pleas Court judge accused of sexual misconduct by a county probation officer is asking a federal judge to dismiss the woman's lawsuit.
In a motion filed Tuesday, attorney Thomas McGinnis says the lawsuit filed against President Judge Thomas Doerr by Crystal Starnes fails to demonstrate “any violation” of Starnes First Amendment rights; fails to state a “legally sufficient claim” for violation of her 14th Amendment right to equal protection; fails to demonstrate how Starnes' procedural due process rights were violated; fails to state an “actionable claim” of retaliation against Starnes; and argues that Doerr is entitled to “qualified immunity with respect to the claims asserted in the (complaint).”
The motion also argues that Starnes' lawsuit should be dismissed because her claims are “largely based upon time-barred events dating back to 2004, and (she) seeks to relitigate matters that were resolved,” by a settlement in 2014.
Starnes, in a lawsuit filed in October of last year, alleges that she and Doerr engaged in a years-long affair that Doerr initiated shortly before Starnes was hired as a probation officer by the county.
In her lawsuit, Starnes claims that Doerr would initiate sexual encounters with her in a “business” relationship she felt she had little say in, and that she was subsequently the target of workplace harassment and retaliation at the hands of other courthouse employees who developed “resentment, antipathy and anger” toward her because of her relationship with Doerr.
In the motion to dismiss filed Tuesday, Doerr's attorney argues that Starnes' lawsuit fails to live up to the legal standard for arguing constitutional violations have occurred.
“(Starnes) ... attempts to disguise trivial workplace grievances as alleged violations of her constitutional rights,” a brief filed in support of the motion to dismiss reads, in part.
The brief also criticizes Starnes' legal filings as being “pled in dramatacized, conclusory fashion which does not rise to the level of constitutional concern.”
Since Starnes' claims don't rise to the level of violations of “'clearly established' constitutional rights,” McGinnis argues in legal filings, Doerr is entitled to “qualified immunity” from all of the allegations in her complaint.
“Qualified immunity 'protect[s] government's ability to perform its traditional functions ... by helping to avoid 'unwarranted timidity' in performance of public duties, ensuring that talented candidates are not deterred from public service, and preventing the harmful distractions from carrying out work of government that can often accompany damages suits,” the filing states, in part.
