Government

Mayor and Deputy Mayor Named in Former County Counsel's Lawsuit

Suit alleges that the Republicans' vote to replace former municipal judge David Lafferty was politically motivated.

By Zak Koeske
Email the author
June 14, 2012

17 Comments

‹ Back to Article

new

Embed | Share

Fair Lawn Republican councilmembers Ed Trawinski and Jeanne Baratta Photo courtesy of Ed Trawinski and Jeanne Baratta

Photos (1)

Photos

Fair Lawn Republican councilmembers Ed Trawinski and Jeanne Baratta

Credit Photo courtesy of Ed Trawinski and Jeanne Baratta

Upload Photos and Videos

A Montvale lawyer and Democratic contributor, who previously served as assistant county counsel, is suing both Mayor Jeanne Baratta and Deputy Mayor Ed Trawinski for their votes earlier this year to replace her husband as Fair Lawn's municipal court judge.

Kelly Durkin, whom NorthJersey.com reported is also suing the county executive and former county counsel over her removal as assistant county counsel last July, alleges in the suit that Baratta and Trawinski opted not to re-appoint her husband, David Lafferty, as municipal court judge because of her ongoing dispute with the county.

Durkin, who had served as assistant county counsel for more than eight years under the previous Democratic regime, was relieved of her duties on July 8 of last year, six months after the Donovan regime took office.

She alleges that her firing was not performance-related and was instead the result of her actively campaigning for former County Executive Dennis McNerney, who opposed Kathleen Donovan in the 2010 County Executive race.

Trawinski said Tuesday that his vote to oust Lafferty as Fair Lawn's municipal court judge had nothing to do with Durkin's dispute with the county. In fact, he said he did not realize Durkin and Lafferty were married because they do not share the same last name. Rather, he said he voted to replace Lafferty -- whose appointment he had never supported -- because of the judge's history of political contributions.

From 2000 to 2005, Lafferty donated more than $22,000 to the Bergen County Democratic Organization, while his wife, Durkin, gave $17,800 to the BCDO between 2006 and 2007, according to campaign finance records.

Lafferty became the municipal court judge in 2006, the same year Fair Lawn enacted its original pay-to-play ordinance, which means his wife's contributions technically ran afoul of the law at the time. Due to a previous loophole in the ordinance, however, Lafferty would not have been prevented from serving as municipal judge as long as the position had been advertised.

Follow Fair Lawn Patch on Facebook and Twitter, and subscribe to receive our daily newsletter in your inbox each morning

Thanks. We'll email you the next time we update this story.

Stuart Pace

10:18 pm on Thursday, June 14, 2012

Lafferty was a great judge, but don't you lose your job when the other party wins? Residents should be able to vote for manager and judge and remove politics from these important positions.

Ed Rooney

6:57 am on Friday, June 15, 2012

HAHA Voting will not include politics?

Bruce Knuckle

7:44 am on Friday, June 15, 2012

Its nice to see, that these 2 are consistent in something. Lawsuits are their defining achievement. How much more does it take for folks to realize that Ed is a bully liar and Baratta is just plain stupid?

Chris Antonelli

11:17 am on Friday, June 15, 2012

Boo hoo, you fired my husband because of me? Are you kidding me? Really Mr Knuckle? I guess if you decided to off yourself if you lost your job, your family should sue Obama for his horrendous economic track record.

Tommy P

11:24 am on Friday, June 15, 2012

Democrats initiate lawsuits (aka sore loser suits) and Republicans are to blame for challenging their plunder. You didn't get the memo?

LENNY

8:36 am on Friday, June 15, 2012

HOW MUCH IS THIS GOING TO COST THE TAXPAYERS !

Walter Weglein

9:30 am on Friday, June 15, 2012

enough to prove the old Chinese proverb: do not also try to serve the citizens of Fair Lawn when you get your salary and benefits from Bergen County...

The Most Interesting Man in the World

9:43 am on Friday, June 15, 2012

They get to latch onto the government teat for their political affiliations, then sue because they lose their appointments when the politics change, which they know going into the job. This just goes to show you how valuable these political appointments really are. They are like gold and happy to fork over 10s of thousands in political contributions to receive hundreds of thousands into millions in salaries and benefits over the years. Those who are suing don't care how much it costs the taxpayer and those who are appointed to defend such suits get paid handsome sums. This is just a stimulus package for their colleagues in arms. When the politics change again, appointments change and the suing is just part of saying thanks. See the synergy of how all this works? You can see that the taxpayer is the last or never considered in these matters and just looked at as a cow to be milked for 6 figure settlements, salaries, medical benefits and fees. The taxpayer has no interest in this game of musical chairs.

Tommy P

10:14 am on Friday, June 15, 2012

Its time for loser pays in these type of cases. NO ONE should EVER be entitled to a government job. He had a contract it was not renewed. No explanation need is due to anyone other then the voters. I find it ironic that Lafferty isn't suing since he is the one who wasn't renewed.

Its a shame Durkin & Lafferty won't be held to account for attempting to use the courts to extort us.

Its also a shame that a person politically appointed has the power to jail people for up to 6 month (no jury). Welcome to NJ.

Have the T-shirt

1:07 pm on Friday, June 15, 2012

The Judge isn't suing because he was not fired for cause, his term ended. So should the appointments of senior professional staff hired in the counties of NJ, then this crap would not happen.

NJ should have a statutory distinction between civil service professionals and political appointees, as well as a state Hartch Act, just like the federal system. If the law was set up so the new regime did not have to fire them for cause after a regime change (often on dummied up charges as is likely the situation here or there would be no litigation) rather than end the job with the term of the appointing authority by statue, taxpayers would not need to shell out tax dollares for such suits. Workfare for municipal lawyers who do the revolving door between government and private practice as it is, so no traction on changing this in Trenton unless it becomes a popular reform issue like pay to play and pension reform have in the past decade.

Mayor and Deputy Mayor Named in Former County Counsel's Lawsuit