Quantcast

Mercer County wants dismissal from former deputy sheriff's retaliation lawsuit

PENNSYLVANIA RECORD

Tuesday, December 3, 2024

Mercer County wants dismissal from former deputy sheriff's retaliation lawsuit

Federal Court
Webp emilycdowning

Downing | Marshall Dennehey

PITTSBURGH – Mercer County is seeking to be dismissed from litigation from a former deputy sheriff, who claimed that after he made two unsuccessful bids for election to the position of sheriff, his political opponents retaliated against him at work.

Anthony Tedesco of West Middlesex first filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on Feb. 26 versus Mercer County, Pennsylvania, the Sheriff of Mercer County, Pennsylvania and Sheriff Tim Callahan, in his individual capacity, all of Mercer.

Tedesco alleged that he was unjustly removed from his position after running for the position of Mercer County Sheriff twice. In 2019, he ran against another Deputy Sheriff, Bruce Rosa, in the Republican primary election. Rosa won and subsequently removed Tedesco from the Mercer County Critical Incident Response Team without explanation, the suit claimed.

In 2023, Tedesco ran again for Sheriff against fellow deputy sheriff Callahan. Despite initially stating he would not support either candidate, Rosa endorsed Callahan, who went on to win the election, the suit said.

On Jan. 2 – just hours after Callahan was sworn in as sheriff – Tedesco received an Administrative Hearing Notice informing him of his suspension with pay and a Pre-Discharge Administrative Hearing scheduled for Jan. 4, he said.

After the hearing, Tedesco was fired without being told why, the suit claimed.

UPDATE

On May 6, Mercer County filed a motion to dismiss itself from the case, since “[the] plaintiff’s complaint identifies no grounds for Mercer County to be a party to this case, including municipal liability under Monell, which is not even alleged in the pleading.”

“The only apparent basis for the plaintiff’s claim against Mercer County is that the County was his employer or joint employer with Sheriff Callahan. The complaint contains no factual allegations to establish an employment relationship with Mercer County. Instead, the claim and applicable law demonstrate that Mercer County was not the plaintiff’s employer where Sheriff Callahan had the independent legal authority to control and terminate his employment. All elected sheriffs in Pennsylvania retain the right to hire, fire, and supervise employees. This statutory authority supports the conclusion that courts in this Circuit have consistently reached that county sheriffs are final policymakers with regard to employment decisions concerning deputy sheriffs,” the dismissal motion stated, in part.

“Sherriff Callahan has independent authority and autonomy with regard to the appointment and termination of deputy sheriffs in Mercer County, as a matter of law. Specifically, the Sheriff of Mercer County is an independently elected County official, vested with his own powers, duties and responsibilities. Furthermore, a County has no authority to remove a sheriff, as that may be only effectuated through impeachment. Therefore, Sheriff Callahan’s independent legal authority over employment decisions involving his deputies precludes Mercer County from being held liable for the termination of plaintiff in this case.”

Additionally, the motion stated that the plaintiff’s complaint “does not include a claim of municipal liability against Mercer County pursuant to Monell v. Dept. of Social Services, therefore, there was no basis for the County to be held liable in this case.”

For counts of violating the First and Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the plaintiff is seeking an injunction preventing him from suffering discrimination and retaliation for constitutionally-protected activities, reinstatement to his role with back pay and benefits, compensatory damages, punitive damages against defendant Callahan, individually, costs, expenses, reasonable attorney’s fees, loss of wages, benefits and loss of pension value and such further relief as this Court deems to be just and proper.

The plaintiff is represented by John E. Black III of Edgar Snyder & Associates, in Pittsburgh.

The defendants are represented by Emily Claire Downing and G. Jay Habas of Marshall Dennehey, in Erie.

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania case 2:24-cv-00238

From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com

More News