FAIRMONT — The attorney representing the Town of Rivesville filed the motion to dismiss former Police Chief Lamon Simpson’s discrimination lawsuit in Marion Circuit Court on Aug. 28.
Along with the town’s point by point response to Simpson’s complaint was a partial motion to dismiss the lawsuit’s count III: Disparate Impact Based on Race.
“In his complaint, Plaintiff has not identified any employment practice or policy that caused a disparate impact on African Americans or on any other class protected by the West Virginia Human Rights Act,” Attorney Jeffrey M. Cropp wrote in the motion. Cropp represents the town.
What Cropp’s argument boils down to is, for the type of argument Simpson is trying to make, he has to show some Town policy or procedure which impacts a protected class, like Black employees, as a whole. However, Simpson didn’t pinpoint a specific policy or procedure which accomplished this in his suit. The evidence Simpson used for count III doesn’t fit the argument he’s making, making it invalid.
“Rather, the crux of his Complaint is that Defendant discriminated against just him,” Cropp wrote.
Overall, the town broadly denied the allegations in Simpsons lawsuit.
Simpson, a police officer who is Black, filed a lawsuit against Rivesville on June 24 for wrongful termination based on race as well as discrimination during his employment. Simpson’s lawyer, Sean Cook, said Rivesville subjected his client to numerous incidents of racial harassment and unequal treatment. One more infamous episode was when Simpson received an anonymous phone call asking if he was the “nchief,” before threatening war. Simpson alleges the town’s mayor at the time, Barbara Beatty, warned him he should reconsider his position if he couldn’t handle hearing the n-word.
In it’s defense, Rivesville either denied specific allegations Simpson made or claimed to not have any factual information to form an opinion on some of the claims in the lawsuit. The town’s response also contradicts some of Simpson’s assertions in his lawsuit. The first of which was, while Simpson did hold a meeting to introduce himself in February 2022, Rivesville denied it was an official Town meeting.
The Town wholly denied Beatty ever telling Simpson to reconsider taking the job if he couldn’t handle hearing the n-word.
Beatty’s response to Simpson after the threatening phone call was a major part of Simpson’s lawsuit.
The Town admitted Beatty asked why Simpson had begun storing his cruiser and personal vehicle in the local garage as opposed to the street, but denied Beatty has merely responded with an ‘Oh, OK,’ when Simpson provided the reason. The lawsuit also argues Beatty did not take further action on the phone call because Simpson had advised Beatty he had already gone to the proper authorities about the call and “had taken care of everything,” the lawsuit states.
The town also denied allegations related to an American Census Survey showing the number of people of color in Rivesville is perishingly small. Simpson’s suit alleged a firefighter had notified him that people in the town were complaining he only stopped white people, implying that was the real racism.
The census survey results contradicted that notion.
The response also addresses a conflict between Simpson and the town’s clerk, Erika Corwin. Simpson made a traffic stop of a vehicle in which Corwin’s mother was riding. Corwin told Simpson she was uncomfortable with him pulling over her family. The issue came to a head when Corwin said she would put her two weeks notice in over the issue. Simpson alleged Beatty approached him and told him she didn’t want the town to lose a good worker. The Town admitted Beatty said this, but denied the remaining circumstances around the dispute, which Simpson alleged led to retaliation when he was fired two weeks later.
The town also denied Town Council Member Michelle Bradley making frequent comments implying she wished the return of the racist style of policing from the ‘60s.
On Simpson’s termination, the Town says it doesn’t have enough knowledge or information to say if Councilmen Mark Dorsey and Frank Moore told Simpson the town didn’t need to provide him a reason for termination. It then admits the remaining allegations in paragraph 26 of the complaint, which appear to be Simpson receiving a letter from the councilmen terminating his employment.
The Town’s filing does not include a reason why it terminated Simpson.
The town hired Nathan Lanham, who later harassed a woman in Monongah, to replace Simpson. Simpson alleged Lanham was brought on at a higher pay rate which had been denied to Simpson. The Town responded regarding the decision to hire Lanham at a higher wage was due to a legitimate business reason and not discriminatory. However, it does not give what that reason was.
Simpson alleged that Lanham planned to filed criminal charges for not turning in town equipment when Simpson left, which Simpson said had never left town property. The town denied it planned to pursue those charges against Simpson.
As part of its defense, the Town argued it exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct any harassing behavior, which Simpson failed to take advantage of. It also argues the damages Simpson seeks were caused by events outside the Town’s control and cannot be liable for.
Cropp’s firm, Steptoe & Johnson, previously said its lawyers do not talk to reporters. Cook, Simpson’s attorney, is determined to fight for his client.
“We are committed to ensuring that justice is served and that Mr. Simpson is compensated for the unlawful actions taken against him,” Cook said previously. “No individual should face discrimination or retaliation for upholding the law and performing his duties with integrity.”