Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
City will pay to defend Gatelli
BY STACY BROWN
STAFF WRITER
06/28/2007
Email to a friendPrinter-friendly
The city is picking up the tab through its liability insurance carrier to defend City Council President Judy Gatelli from a $1 million defamation lawsuit.
It remains to be seen, however, if the city will pay for a counterclaim Mrs. Gatelli has filed against the original plaintiff.
Legal experts say it is not uncommon for municipalities to defend their officials.
“In fact, it would be unusual if the city didn’t step in and agree to defend her,” H. Amos Goodall, a State College-based attorney who specializes in municipal law, said Wednesday. “Typically, municipalities do help defend their directors, board members and council members.”
Although experts also agree that it would be appropriate for the city to fund Mrs. Gatelli’s countersuit as well, the city’s solicitor said the answer to that question is still up in the air.
“The city is paying to defend the suit because Mrs. Gatelli is a public official,” city solicitor Rob Farrell said. “I am not certain if the insurance is covering the counterclaim. I haven’t received an itemized description of the bill, so I don’t know if the counterclaim is involved or not.”
“In a case like this one, the defense and any counterclaim arising from the same facts would be handled by the same lawyer,” said Mr. Goodall, who agreed that countersuits are legitimate defensive tools in a lawuit and, in this case, should also be funded by the city. “Often the counterclaim simply piggybacks on the defensive claim.”
Political gadfly Joseph Pilchesky filed a lawsuit in April against the council president, claiming she defamed him when she told The Times-Tribune she felt threatened by posts on Mr. Pilchesky’s anti-administration Web site. Mrs. Gatelli canceled a council meeting and the city took new security measures, including police officers using hand-held metal detectors, because of the alleged threats. Mr. Pilchesky has asked for $1 million in damages.
Mrs. Gatelli followed with a counterclaim, asking a judge to force Mr. Pilchesky to reveal the names of those who post anonymously on his site. Mrs. Gatelli is seeking $100,000 in compensatory damages and unspecified punitive damages.
“It sounds ... like the council president has a right to be defended by the city,” said Michael J. Witherel, solicitor for the Pennsylvania Municipal Authorities Association. “There is also case law that says (Mrs. Gatelli) cannot be sued for making comments in her official capacity. Numerous times countersuits are used to help defend cases because you pile it on with a countersuit to get the other party to back off their case. The best defense, sometimes, is a good offense.”
The fact that Mrs. Gatelli works on the legislative side of city government and her legal expenses are being paid by the executive branch really doesn’t make a difference, said William E. Vinsko Jr., a Wilkes-Barre attorney who specializes in municipal law.
“If the question of her being sued in her individual capacity is the issue, then the insurance company could defend her under a ‘reservation-of-rights’ clause,” Mr. Vinsko said.
A reservation-of-rights clause means the insurance company would agree to pay for the defense, but if it is clearly determined later that Mrs. Gatelli acted outside her capacity as council president, the carrier could decline to pay damages.
“The insurance company is reserving the right to challenge coverage,” council solicitor Amil Minora said. “But I’ve said all along that the city should defend her, because she is a councilperson and not just a citizen at the grocery store.”
One reason the city has decided to defend Mrs. Gatelli is the potential costs involved in the suit, Mayor Chris Doherty said.
“Judy Gatelli is a public official, and she could go broke paying to defend herself in this matter,” he said. “I met with Mr. Minora and I met with Mr. Farrell, and they agreed this was appropriate.”
Mrs. Gatelli, who is out of town, could not be reached for comment.
The question of who is paying for the suit is a hot topic among regular speakers at council meetings. Some have demanded to know whether the city was backing Mrs. Gatelli, but she has refused to answer.
“If it were me, I’d just answer the question. That’s my opinion as to what I’d do,” Councilman Bill Courtright said. “My opinion has been that (Mrs. Gatelli) should just answer the question and just get it out there once and for all, because these speakers are not going to let the issue die.”
I'm sorry, but while I'm not the biggest fan at all of Judith Gatelli, I likewise think Joe Pilchesky is far out-of-line by filing a seven-figure lawsuit against her. I agree with Mrs. Gatelli that seeing an avatar appear on DohertyDeceit with what could have been a political figure having his head explode would be unnerving to say the least, especially if I were at the center of that particular individual's ire. I don't think Judith is in oblivion; she knows that a growing number of city residents outside of her close circle of friends detests her, and it wouldn't be unreasonable for her to worry that some might become so passionate that they might fantasize about her death as well. While I think the woman is pompous, arrogant, and doesn't handle herself with much class, she also doesn't deserve to have to fear for her life while walking around town just because the uneducated people who post on DohertyDeceit on a regular basis don't know where to "draw the line" between rightfully criticizing her policies as a public official and degenerating into juvenile banter that COULD very easily be mistaken for violence.
I personally think Pilchesky filed this lawsuit not just because he has a "beef" with Gatelli but also because he hopes to ride the coattails of this lawsuit to being championed as the "man of the people" as some sort of Scranton hero that could propel him into political office in the future. This lawsuit is bringing both he and his website tremendous exposure to the media and the residents of Lackawanna, Wyoming, and Northern Luzerne Counties who read the Scranton Times-Tribune.
I also had to laugh at his INCREDIBLE letter to the editor a few months back in which he attempted to defend his stance and his web site by claiming that anyone was free to register on DohertyDeceit to post their opinions, including Judy Gatelli. LIAR! I attempted a few months before he submitted that letter to the editor to create a membership on DohertyDeceit under this same user name of "ScrantonWilkesBarre," and my membership was denied approval, likely because he knew I was an anti-radical who wouldn't further his cause of trying to make the city's government sink like the Titanic. I was very, very tempted to compose my own rebuttal letter to the editor detailing how he lied with his joke about "open membership" when he honestly picks and chooses who gets to post there, and he bans users whenever he sees them losing their anti-political slants (I've heard this from several others as well). I refrained from making a fool out of him in the Times-Tribune simply because I knew he'd likely add me to the lawsuit as well for "defamation of character" at which point I'd also have to secure our family's attorney to launch a massive countersuit effort against him, just as Gatelli has done. I'd then probably have other friends coming to my defense, at which point this lawsuit would have exploded to a multi-county legal brou-ha-ha that would make its way to CNN, FoxNews, AP, etc. in order to hurt the city's image nationwide.
What has Pilchesky's lawsuit accomplished thus far? Well, he's tainted the image of the city to outsiders and has shown through his letter to the editor that he is a LIAR. Why would I openly-support a lawsuit being filed by someone who I know has willingly lied to thousands of people in the Scranton Times-Tribune against another admitted liar? Isn't that just like "the pot calling the kettle black?" Anyone who truly thinks Joe Pilchesky is a "visionary" of sorts truly needs to stop exalting him onto his pedestal and further investigate the man's credibility before reaching a conclusion.
Furthermore, will Pilchesky be viewed as a "hero" by his short-sighted comrades if he should reign victorious in this lawsuit, and the city's expenditures jump instantly by $1,050,000? Where will this money come from? TAXPAYERS. Will those who support Pilchesky do the same when they are hit in their pocketbooks to pay the damages for this frivolous lawsuit based upon passion moreso than merit? One thing I'll say about Scrantonians is that I'm never ceased to be amazed by how short-sighted and FICKLE so many of you are. You're all on this "pro-Pilchesky" bandwagon right now, but I can guarantee you'll all be jumping ship when you have to shell out more tax money to pay for his settlement, at which point he'll likely laugh all the way to the bank, sell his home, and move to a McMansion in the Abingtons. He's no dummy. He'll be set for life, and these same uneducated buffoons who post on DohertyDeceit on a regular basis with all sorts of tirades laden with HORRIFIC grammar will quickly forget about their "hero" and move onto somebody else. Even when Doherty's administration and the "Doherty Three" on council are out of office, they're the types of people who will still be complaining about them for years and years afterwards on that message board instead of looking forward to the city's optimistic future with more competent leadership at the helm.
I see no reason to further exalt this man onto a pedestal that is higher than he's already on. You know what? I could likewise wage a similar frivolous lawsuit against Pilchesky for having a so-called "open" registration policy on DohertyDeceit while not permitting me to join for some reason. If I wanted to be overdramatic, I could insinuate that he had not permitted me to register because I was a homosexual, at which point national media attention would be attracted to both he and the city. Is that true? Nope. He likely denied me because he knew I wouldn't side with him on his forum and didn't want to deal with the dissent. However, is HIS lawsuit likewise "untrue" in that all of Gatelli's claims were unfounded? You better believe it. If I were on city council and saw an avatar like that or had to endure reading about a Junior Council President being a "twit" that should be "strangled by the tie around his neck," then I'd be up in arms as well. There's a fine line between criticizing our elected officials and DEMEANING them, and you Scrantonians continuously cross the line. Well, now a few of you have gone too far, and frivolity has resulted. When those higher taxes come to offset the legal expenses, who will you blame? Pilchesky or Gatelli? Bear in mind that this man is no "angel" himself by any means either by openly-LYING in a newspaper and signing his name to it. Typical political-wannabe from the city.
As for me, I'm retracting my dream of running for city council in the upcoming years, as I don't want to subject myself to people like this on a regular basis. If they'll make fun of Sherry Nealon-Fanucci for being obese by calling her "Fatucci", then I don't want to know what these same uneducated people will say about me for being gay. You better believe that the first unflattering comment I receive about my sexual orientation on DohertyDeceit would definitely be met by legal action, erupting the city into another political brou-ha-ha of sorts simply because so many of you don't have your heads on straight with how to protest without going overboard. You don't see these same problems in similarly-corrupt Pittston, Wilkes-Barre, Hazleton, etc., do you? What's so different about Scranton? (Daniel, before you climb onto the soapbox to answer that question with claims about "ridiculous" taxes and "unfair" speaking lengths at meetings, bear in mind that many, many other cities in the state have higher property taxes and less time to speak at meetings, yet the residents are placid).
Last edited by SteelCityRising; 06-28-2007 at 07:27 AM..
Reason: Type
Of course the tax payers will pay for the lawsuit. Thats why pilchesky filed it. He is giant joke of a man with nothing more than a massive inferiority complex. He wants people to know his name and have folks in high places fear him. Truth be told, he can file laswsuits all day long.....the people he is suing have the fnds to defend and at this point the public knows this guy is a joke.
Gatelli is not doing a good job nor is she doing a bad job. She just doesnt bend over backward for the unions. They are the root of all this. They have become accustomed to getting what they ask for by conners and crew and now that isnt the case. Therefore they hate hate hate doherty and go afte anyone associated with him. They may sound off on the internet and giv off all these facts, then when you actually meet them in person you have to ask yourself how you ever let them waste your time by paying attention to them.
Janet Evens and FAY and all the rest of these whiney and grandstanding malcontents need to pay attention to their own failing lives before they criticize for the sake of criticism.
at which point this lawsuit would have exploded to a multi-county legal brou-ha-ha that would make its way to CNN, FoxNews, AP, etc. in order to hurt the city's image nationwide.
...speaking of fantasy. He's lucky the story's getting picked up at the Times Leader. No shot at all of this ever getting to CNN, FOX, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScrantonWilkesBarre
You're all on this "pro-Pilchesky" bandwagon right now
WRONG. WRONG. WRONG. Pilchesky has his fans to be sure, but it's a small fan club. The majority of the city either don't pay him any attention, or think he's a jackass, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScrantonWilkesBarre
If I wanted to be overdramatic, I could insinuate that he had not permitted me to register because I was a homosexual, at which point national media attention would be attracted to both he and the city.
Overdramatic or delusional? None of this is ever going to atttract "national media attention". YouTube doesn't count.
The type of thing that is happening with council in scranton is happening all over the country. It is happening here in FLa right now as well.
National media doesnt care because no one other than NEPA has ever heard of any of the players. Pilchesky suffers from delusions of grandure . He thinks he is great and his 25 supporters add fule to his limp fire. Like i said before everyone he sues or attacks or anything else sees him as a A-typical job hazard. Every mayor or senator or anyone in power has their detractors who sue and make up gossip. You deak with it and move on. Doherty has never mentioned his name. (Execpt in regards to gatelli) he is a typical NEPA roundhead.
I'm happy to see that not all Scrantonians are having wet dreams over this guy, as I had been lead to believe by a few others. It's truly refreshing. I don't like Gatelli either, especially after she called Daniel "disgraceful" after the last meeting for voicing his well-researched opinions, but anyone who thinks Pilchesky doesn't have an ulterior motive behind this lawsuit in terms of furthering his notoriety in order to rise in power isn't seeing the WHOLE picture very clearly.
If he has nothing to hide, then why does he deny people like me the chance to register at DohertyDeceit, as well as ban any and all who disagree with him? What is he so afraid of? Is he afraid that some of us might be intelligent enough to turn the tables against him on his own forum? These questions are all purely rhetorical, but it truly makes one wonder a bit, does it not? How can his site be considered "open registration," as he insinuated in his editorial, when he picks and chooses who he allows to speak? Doesn't that sound a bit hypocritical to anyone with half a brain stem?
I better stop sounding off soon before he adds all of us to his lawsuit as well, but I just want to let it be known that this man lied in the newspaper and signed his name to it; what will that say about him in the future if he does attempt to use this local media exposure to propel him onto city council? I wouldn't be so quick to exalt him onto this pedestal of authority that he's been placed upon by the Legion of Doom and the other malcontents (Daniel not included). What's so "heroic" about causing taxes to spike for single mothers, the elderly, etc. to pay for a lawsuit forged upon pride instead of content?
First lets start by saying that what you read in the times is not really the truth. Second Mr. Pilchesky is not running for office and as no plans.
I will break this down and try to explain as much as I can. I will do this openly not taking sides. The avatar that you seem to think is unnerving is a scene cut from the movie scanners, not to mention that there are many and many avatars on that site that are much worse. Let me say that I am registered under my full name on that site and I post under my name. I have posted twice maybe three times in reference to the flooding. I also have been a victim of the times media Doherty machine when they printed that " I was cited" and yet I have never been not to this day. This is also the same rag that reported that Mr. Pilchesky was going to be arrested 3 times for things or threats from that web site but yet has not. This last little routine with Judy and the threats was orchestrated to get the cameras out and bring down the DD site because lets face it they do not like what is being said there. It backfired, the site is protected by the 1st amendment and the cameras were met with a large public out cry. Regardless of what you think about Joe Pilchesky, Judy and this admin still do not have the right to publicly say what they did and make accusations of DEATH THREATS against them. There were never any DEATH THREATs and I think we can all agree on that. But they still attempted to shame him or slander him in the rag like they did to me. Mr. Pilchesky's lawsuit was against the individual Judy gatelli and if you would taken the time to read it you would see that in the capacity of Judy Gatelli she made those remarks and comments. She has no right to use taxpayers money and she will in the end be held accountable for the fees and cost from the insurance company if she loses so you see how the media spin plays this out right......They do not bother to tell you that if she loses that she will held accountable for it from the insurance company because she is being sued in a individual capacity and not as the president of the city council. This is where they are trying to get the rest of you to speak out against the tyrant Joe Pilchesky for suing her and making us pay. We will not pay and he has not been arrested and I have not been cited.. Lies and lies and lies, but its ok becasue its in the paper right. You are all aware that the Lynetts own all the papers in the entire region right? They purchased the times leader and the hazelton paper and a few others so now they control the media in NEPA with a single family pro doherty media empire, sounds like a monopoly to me.
As for 570717 you need to just keep your comments in Floride because you are out of touch with what is really going on here if you feel that Judy is not doing a bad job, and what the hell do the unions have to do with Daron NE or the flooding of Lower Greenridge as well the East Mountain and keyser valley areas that have begging for help but get nothing. Your union comments lead me to believe that A. You are here and lying or B. Your family is Doherty supporters. I asked Judy to help with the flooding and she told me to call 1-800- god, then we asked for help with Draon and she told me to sue them, both times she avoided her responsiblity to do her job and work for the residents of the city. Not to mention if you live in Florida how the hell do you know what goes on at these meetings, are you going on your families input......Who exactly is your family, you know who I am and Paul and Ed we do not hide. Who are you???? Who is your family and what building in the city do they own???? You want to have a valid point in this argument from Florida then come out and tell us who you are? Until then keep your replies to yourself about what we have to deal with here in Scranton, I do not like armchair quaterbacks especially those who hide there indentities and live outside the state nevermind the region. I can debate this all day long but only with vaild people who do not hide who they are. The unions your right, so do you think its ok that the police & fire dept's has not had a raise in 6yrs? and that they have to live in the city and pay the increase but with increase in their salaries to help adjust to the increased cost of living? they have to do the same job but more since we have cut their numbers but they have to do it on 2001 salaries, its ok right because the unions are bad right, the fire and police are not needed here in the city because there is no crime in scranton and we the malcontents do not deserve police and fire services especailly if they are union right?? You are a out of line and ilinformed my friend but thats ok because you are in sunny florid right. WHO ARE YOU???? Be honest live up to your statements and face the music, I do everyday. I do not hide behind my family or username.
The Lynetts (Shamrock Communications) do not own the Times Leader, nor have they ever. They've owned the Citizen's Voice since 2001. Richard L. Connor and HM Capital from Texas own the Times Leader. The Pocono Record is owned by Ottaway Community Newspapers, out of NY. That's two newspapers that it took all of two minutes to research the ownership of, but it takes the drama (as well as accuracy) out of the "single family pro doherty media empire" statement. And while it may sound like a monopoly to you, to anyone else with a grasp of the definition, it's not even close. Some empire...
And it might just be me, but aren't "threats" in the eye of the "threatened"? Who are you to say that anyone was or wasn't feeling threatened?
Shamrock communications does in fact own the Times Leader and they just recently purchased the paper and moved thier headquarters from the Scranton office to the Times Leader building in Wilkes Barre. Research that thru the Times Leader archives. This happened in May, my friend, then they moved the headquarters there by the end of the month. You can research what you want, but they own the Times Leader, Citizens Voice, Hazelton Standard Speaker, Scranton Times. Look abit harder....The article of the move made the Times Leader not the Scranton Times. Look abit deeper and you'll see that they are now headquarterd in the Times Leader Building in WB. I have never misquoted or made false statements here or anywhere else.
You really do not want to get into the threats comments with me, I receive hate mail all the time and its bad, to the point were I have a more than one meeting with the FBI, they approached me. I am threatened everytime it rains and thats a creditable threat as are the pollutants in the air in my neighborhood, as well as the hate mail(Its very graphic). I have never mentioned it in public nor do I bring this up at the meetings, that is the by-product of being a public offical and a elected representative of a neighborhood assoc. I understand that and I move forward not letting this deter me from i feel is right and just for the residents of this city. Judy needs to grow a set or reseign if she cannot take the heat generated by being a public offical.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Gatelli = Liar? Yep! ; Pilchesky = Liar? Yep!
While I think the woman is pompous, arrogant, and doesn't handle herself with much class, she also doesn't deserve to have to fear for her life while walking around town just because the uneducated people who post on DohertyDeceit on a regular basis don't know where to "draw the line" between rightfully criticizing her policies as a public official and degenerating into juvenile banter that COULD very easily be mistaken for violence. 
Anyone who truly thinks Joe Pilchesky is a "visionary" of sorts truly needs to stop exalting him onto his pedestal and further investigate the man's credibility before reaching a conclusion. 
You better believe that the first unflattering comment I receive about my sexual orientation on DohertyDeceit would definitely be met by legal action, erupting the city into another political brou-ha-ha of sorts simply because so many of you don't have your heads on straight with how to protest without going overboard. You don't see these same problems in similarly-corrupt Pittston, Wilkes-Barre, Hazleton, etc., do you? What's so different about Scranton? (Daniel, before you climb onto the soapbox to answer that question with claims about "ridiculous" taxes and "unfair" speaking lengths at meetings, bear in mind that many, many other cities in the state have higher property taxes and less time to speak at meetings, yet the residents are placid).
I don't like Gatelli either, especially after she called Daniel "disgraceful" after the last meeting for voicing his well-researched opinions, but anyone who thinks Pilchesky doesn't have an ulterior motive behind this lawsuit in terms of furthering his notoriety in order to rise in power isn't seeing the WHOLE picture very clearly. 
