Marion Patricia Paad had a huge pay day last week.
The former deputy clerk for Oxford Village received a $300,000 check from the Michigan Municipal League’s (MML) Liability and Property Pool as settlement for her lawsuit against the municipality.
Paad had sued the village in U.S. District Court for malicious prosecution and retaliating against her for exercising her First Amendment rights.
She claimed that a result of speaking up about wrongdoing in the village, she was falsely accused of embezzling public funds in 2011. A jury found her not guilty the following year.
‘She wanted to clear her name and I think this goes a long way towards clearing her name,? said Flint attorney Tom Pabst, who represented Paad.
The MML was the village’s insurance carrier during the time frame in which Paad’s claims were set. The MML, not the village, was responsible for paying the entire settlement amount.
‘I’m not happy with (the settlement), but I’m glad that it’s over,? Paad said. ‘I needed to get the toxic out of my life . . . It could have dragged on longer and I needed to get that toxic poison out of my life, so I could move forward.?
Paad noted she would have been happier with the original $2.5 million that she sued for.
‘It could have went to court and we could have possibly gotten it, but then I thought about it dragging on and on (for years), and I didn’t want to do that,? she said. ‘I wanted it over.?
Paad believes the settlement does help clear her name.
‘If they weren’t guilty of anything, why would they settle with me?? she said.
Even though the settlement agreement contained language specifically stating it was ‘not an admission of liability? on the village’s part, Pabst said the $300,000 Paad received speaks very loudly.
‘If I felt one of my secretaries stole from me, I’d fight it to the death. I’d never pay a dime,? Pabst said. ‘They paid $300,000. So, what does that tell you? They can say it’s not an admission of liability all they want, but it says a lot to me.?
The settlement was proposed back in October and approved by the village council, but it didn’t become binding until approved by the MML’s Liability and Property Pool board last week.
Village attorney Bob Davis said it was really the MML’s call to settle this case. The village had very little to say about it, so he doesn’t view it as any type of vindication for Paad or admission of liability on the municipality’s part.
‘The village procures a certain type of insurance coverage wherein the insurance carrier decides when and how much the village will settle litigation for,? he explained. ‘In this instance, the insurance company made the decision to settle this case and the village agreed to do it. I don’t personally view this as a vindication of anything.?
Davis said the more accurate portrayal of the settlement is ‘an insurance company minimizing its risk (during) the final hours of litigation.?
‘This was really an insurance company decision minimizing its risk and minimizing its own exposure because it was going to be paid by them,? he said.
Davis noted had the village refused to settle, took the case to trial and lost, the municipality would have been ‘on the hook? for any amount awarded by the jury above the proposed $300,000 settlement.
Pabst credited U.S. District Judge George Caram Steeh with settling the case.
‘The judge had a lot to do with the settlement,? he said. ‘He got actively involved. He just said, ‘Look, it’s in everyone’s best interest to settle.??
Pabst said the judge explained to the village and its insurance carrier how it could ‘get hit with a big verdict? and have this become ‘the never-ending case? through appeals.
Steeh, according to Pabst, explained to Paad that she ‘could end up with nothing? and ‘it’s better to have some money in your hand, close the chapter, go on with your life.?
Pabst believed settling was the smart thing to do. ‘Who knows what can happen in court? I felt confident. I felt our case was powerful. But there’s something to settling a case and just going on,? he said.
Paad was terminated in March 2011 following accusations that she embezzled more than $3,300 in village property tax payments in 2006 and almost $600 in police department funds in 2010. She was charged with five felony counts of embezzlement by a public official, but in April 2012, an Oakland County Circuit Court jury found her not guilty of all charges.
Alleging lost income, mental anguish and emotional distress, Paad subsequently sued the village, along with Councilwoman Maureen Helmuth, who accused her of embezzling, and Manager Joe Young, in U.S. District Court in December 2012.
As part of the settlement, the claims against Helmuth and Young were dismissed.
In her suit, Paad contended that she had expressed concerns to village officials, management and employees about ‘improper spending/use of taxpayers? money, and/or volunteers stealing taxpayers? money.?
Because of this, she claimed she was retaliated against by being falsely accused of embezzlement ‘to try to cover up (the) defendants? unlawful conduct.?
‘What a terrible thing that happened to Pat Paad,? Pabst said. ‘She’s an ordinary person, a good person, loyal, loves the village and she just truly got scapegoated here. They made her a human lightning rod, in my opinion, to divert attention. It just totally destroyed her.?
Looking ahead, Pabst said Paad will mostly likely have difficulty finding employment elsewhere because as soon as a potential employer does an internet search on her, they’ll find all these news articles about her history with the village.
‘Who the heck is going to take a risk on hiring her?? he said. ‘It’s going to have a terrible impact on her (prospects of) getting a job. You never really get your name back is the point. Even if we got a verdict, you never get (your name) back. People would (still) say, ‘Wasn’t she the one that got fired . . . They’ll always remember the allegation.?
As far as what’s next for Paad, she said, ‘I have to think about that.?
‘I don’t know what road I’m going to take,? she continued. ‘Possibly leave (the) state? I haven’t decided yet. I just know that I do have a fresh, new start and the last four years are behind me. I’m looking at a bright future where I think I can do pretty much anything I want to.?
Paad noted that before she rejoins the workforce, she must still deal with feelings of anger and depression concerning what transpired with the village.
‘I need some more time,? she said. ‘I’m pushing through that. I’m working through it with counseling.?
In June 2012, the village council hired a forensic auditor to conduct an investigation and he determined that $20,684 in property tax money from 2010 is missing. The auditor’s report named Paad as ‘a person of interest? with regard to the missing money. In his report, the auditor noted his comments about Paad ‘do not imply guilt or criminal intent? on the part of the former village employee.
No criminal charges against Paad or anyone else have been issued in connection with this missing money.
Young said the village is still in the process of trying to recoup this missing money from insurance carriers. He said one has already paid the village $865.
The balance, if paid, would come from the MML, according to Young.