Retrial for Eckstein set in Sept.
Two former Butler County commissioners are once more crossing legal swords in court.
The retrial for the defamation case against former Commissioner Jim Eckstein has been set to start no later than Sept. 14.
Jury selection begins Sept. 12. If a jury is selected by the morning of Sept. 13, the trial will start that day before presiding Judge Kelley Streib.
Former Commissioner Dale Pinkerton is one of three plaintiffs suing Eckstein for defamation and being placed in a false light.
Attorney Doug Linn, who represents Pinkerton, said there wouldn't be a different game plan in presenting his case against Eckstein.
“We're going to do our best,” Linn said. “We'll see what happens.”
Pinkerton could not be reached for comment. Eckstein referred all questions to his legal representation.
Larry Rodgers, Eckstein's co-counsel, said the defense also would not change course.
“All the facts show the truth,” Rodgers said. “The truth is our client never did anything he was accused of. It's hard for a guy to be liable for something he didn't do.”
Eckstein is accused of spreading a rumor that Pinkerton gave county human resources director Lori Altman an extra 20 percent pay hike in 2011 in exchange for getting out of a drunken driving pullover.
Altman's husband is state Trooper Scott Altman.
The Altmans are suing Eckstein in a separate lawsuit that is being tried simultaneously.
Only Pinkerton is suing Eckstein for intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Lori Altman also declined to comment.
The previous trial ended in a mistrial April 29 after eight days of testimony and arguments.
The jury initially announced they had a verdict, which required at least 10 of the 12 jurors finding in favor of the defendant or plaintiffs, finding Eckstein not liable on any of the civil counts.
However, that verdict was nullified after jurors were polled on their individual votes. The tally was 7 to 5 in favor of Eckstein.Streib then declared a mistrial.Christine Pflugh of Franklin Township, the jury foreman, said in a May interview that five jurors changed their overall stance by voting no during the roll call vote.Pflugh stressed all 12 jurors agreed there was no evidence of defamation.She explained the ensuing confusion resulted from consolidating multiple votes on counts and plaintiffs into one poll.
