patching...
Breaking: Sopranos Star James Gandolfini Dead at 51 »
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Court Decision on Grant's Lawsuit Coming Next Week

Councilwoman Hedy Grant's lawsuit to remove Borough Attorney Marc Leibman went before Superior Court Judge Joseph Conte on Friday afternoon.

 

Listening to arguments from several attorneys, Superior Court Judge Joseph Conte announced that he will issue a decision sometime next week on Councilwoman Hedy Grant's lawsuit to remove Marc Leibman as the borough attorney.

Grant's lawsuit, which was filed in February, called for the court to invalidate the appointment of Borough Attorney Marc Leibman on the basis that his prior representation of Councilman Austin Ashley regarding the potential development of the United Water property by the S. Hekemian Group created a conflict of interest.

Her suit further stated that Ashley was "disqualified by self-interest" from voting for the appointment of Leibman as Borough Attorney. Grant seeks a judicial determination that Ashley had a "disqualifying conflict of interest" by nominating and voting on the appointment of Leibman. Mayor Ann Subrizi was also named in the suit, claiming that she allowed the process to advance rather than allow for more investigation to be completed prior to Leibman's appointment.

"Irreparable harm was raised by the decision of granting rights and approval contracts, things that Mayor Subrizi allowed to take place within the governing body," attorney Douglas C. Anton argued. Anton represents Grant in her suit. "It does harm to the town because every decision is now suspect to reversal and would undo everything that has been done on the council since January 7."

The crux of Grant's suit is that during the January 7 reorganization meeting, Ashley nominated Leibman to serve as borough attorney although Lisa Aljian's name had appeared on the agenda. Leibman had been representing Ashley during the ongoing Hekemian hearings before the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Since his appointment to borough attorney, he has withdrawn from serving as Ashley's attorney in the matter of the United Water property.

"The easy way to resolve this method is for the defendant to provide billing statements from Mr. Leibman's firm to Mr. Ashley," Anton argued. "That would show he had hired an attorney and paid for it. That would resolve the pay-to-play issue."

However Kenneth McPherson who represents Ashley counter-argued that he would be willing to provide copies of the bills to Conte even though he objected to the idea as it was a private business matter.

"Nothing precludes an attorney from taking a position with the borough so long as he is not involved in any private matter that comes before the council," McPherson said. "Mr. Leibman could recuse himself from the council if a developer came before the governing body that he had dealt with before. We have a municipal body that had full disclosure of my client's representation that has since been terminated. The council knew this, deliberated on this and decided it did not constitute a conflict."

Ronald Mondello, who represents the borough, stated that the Grant's claim of an appearance of impropiety no longer exists as Leibman resigned as Ashley's attorney for the Hekemian hearings.

"The plaintiff has not come close to show that Leibman's employment is not in the best interest of New Milford," Mondello said. "There is no conflict of interest."

Conte stated that he will issue a written decision sometime next week.

Follow New Milford Patch on Facebook and TwitterClick here to sign-up for our daily newsletter and get local news like this delivered to your in-box.

Related Topics: Conflict Of Interest, Councilman Austin Ashley, Councilwoman Hedy Grant, Lawsuit, Marc Leibman, and Mayor Ann Subrizi

Mark flores

9:26 pm on Friday, March 15, 2013

There is a conflict of interest and pay to play issue involved here. With the utmost respect for Mr. Leibman, his appointment will only lead to questions as to where his true loyalty lies. Is it with Mr. Ashley or the full council and town he serves?

Reply

new milford dad of 3

8:48 am on Sunday, March 17, 2013

This is a big waste of tax payers money.She is costing the people of New Milford money we dont have.Our taxes will go up because of this and we are laughing stock of other towns around us.Shame on you Mrs Grant but I guess we will see what the judge says in a few days.Hold on New Milford its gonna cost us some $$$$$$$$$$$.

Reply

Adam

10:19 am on Sunday, March 17, 2013

Upholding principles and ethical violations is NEVER a waste of tax payers money! We would be a laughing stock if we let clear appearances of impropriety and conflicts of interest be the norm in New Milford. This issue would never have come up if Ashley had recused himself when the council voted on his personal attorney to the town job. His personal attorney! Does that not bother you? Ms. Grant should be applauded for her courage and insistant on fair dealing and open government!

Reply

Williams

12:33 pm on Sunday, March 17, 2013

I suppose Ms. Grant trying to appoint the wife of River Edge Mayor Sandy Moscaritolo (who happens to be a big money contributor to her campaign) isn't unethical? Or the fact that Mike Putrino is a paid employee of the River Edge Democratic Club (an actual conflict of interest!). Please Ms. Grant get off your soap box. Stop wasting money!

Reply
Comment_arrow

new milford dad of 3

8:09 pm on Sunday, March 17, 2013

Well stated Williams.It is a conflict of what i can see.Shame on them for hiding this!!!!!

Lori Barton

12:51 pm on Sunday, March 17, 2013

Why didn't our mayor ask for a 30 day extension of Madaio's contract so the conflict of interest question could be investigated? That would have been the easiest and smartest way to deal with this. Instead she asked Liebman if his appointment would be a conflict. How can you ask him???? I will be absolutely stunned if the court doesn't call this a conflict. And while it is regrettable that taxpayer funds are being used for this, it is imperative to uphold the law.

Reply

miriam pickett

4:45 pm on Sunday, March 17, 2013

I would lkie to see evidence that Mayor Moscanitolo was "a big money contributor" to Ms. Grant's campaign. Don't make accusations without the proof.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Williams

10:11 pm on Sunday, March 17, 2013

Where is Grants proof? She is suing with nothing more than cheap political attacks and an ambulance chasing attorney. Typical democrats BS, do as I say not as I do.

TommyIce

9:13 am on Monday, March 18, 2013

What I would like to know is why do three Republicans (who support development of the UW property) want the personal attorney of a Democrat who is against the development of UW to be the boro's attorney?

Seems to me there is a story there.

Reply

Leave a comment