Monday, October 30, 2023, 6:16 pm News Flash Archive

The lawsuit filed by Barbara and Marion "Skipper" Grantham against the city of Greenwood, Mayor Carolyn McAdams, and Betty Stigler has been dismissed at the joint request of all parties.

As first reported by The Taxpayers Channel, the Granthams sued the city, the Mayor, and Stigler for what they claimed was retaliation for Skipper Grantham's public criticism of Mayor McAdams' appointment of Jody Bradley to the position of city police chief.

The alleged retaliation included selectively ticketing their vehicle next to their store, when others around them were also illegally parked. Police Chief Craft apparently voided the ticket.

The Granthams also claimed that the city told them they could not display their pottery items for sale on the sidewalk alongside their store, Delta Boutique and Gifts, on the corner of Market and Howard Streets, even though, they claimed, other merchants and vendors were allowed to do so without interference from the city.

See our original reporting here: Local business owners sue Greenwood officials, alleging free speech retaliation

When the city answered the Granthams' complaint, it denied almost every allegation.

The city also demanded that the Granthams pay the city's legal costs. It is rare for a government defendant sued for civil rights violations to ask for legal fees, since it has all the power, insurance coverage, and taxpayer money behind it. It also has a very bad "look" for a government entity to retaliate in such a manner against powerless, helpless citizens.

To read our coverage of the city's response and demand for legal fees, see here: Greenwood demands the Granthams pay city's legal fees in discrimination lawsuit

After the city deposed the Granthams, it filed its Motion for Summary Judgment on July 31, 2023. The memorandum in support of the motion may be read here: City Defendants Memo for Summary Judgment

The city summarized its case for summary judgment this way:

Barbara and Marion [Skipper] Grantham sued the City of Greenwood, Mayor Carolyn McAdams, and Community Development Director Betty Stigler after they received a $25 parking ticket and were made to comply with a City ordinance prohibiting sidewalk displays of merchandise. The Granthams claim these actions were taken in retaliation for their criticism of the new police chief, but this case should begin and end with a few admissions: (1) Barbara Grantham never engaged in speech at all; (2) neither of the Granthams have any evidence that the Mayor or Betty Stigler even knew of Marion [Skipper] Granthams' comments about Jody Bradley's appointment; and (3) the actions the City took have not kept them from speaking or selling their pottery. Summary judgment on all claims is warranted.

Several other key points were raised by the City, Mayor McAdams, and Stigler in the Motion for Summary Judgment. The city claims the Granthams did not produce a single social media post of the alleged statements by Skipper Grantham against the Mayor's police chief appointment, nor could the Granthams name the individuals to whom Skipper had made the comments, except for one employee at the Attorney General's office:

In any event, the Granthams have no evidence that Mayor McAdams or Betty Stigler knew about Marion's speech. Without knowledge of the alleged protected activity, there can be no liability [for retaliation for First Amendment protected speech].

Marion [Skipper Grantham] admitted that he did not speak to the mayor directly, did not speak out at a Board meeting, has no knowledge of who saw the unspecified and unproduced social media posts, and has no knowledge whether the Mayor knew of his conversation with his friend at the Attorney General's Office . . . His evidence consists of alleged comments from unspecified people, whose identity he cannot even remember, saying that Mayor McAdams knew of his social media comments regarding Jody Bradley's authority as police chief to conduct stops.

. . . the evidence shows that neither Mayor McAdams nor Betty Stigler knew of Marion's alleged comments. Both affirmed that they did not know of any comments made by Marion.

The city also argued that the Granthams were indeed in violation of both the parking ordinance and the sidewalk display ordinance, which bars businesses from displaying goods for sale on the streets or sidewalks of the city, although they were never charged or fined for doing so.

Instead, they were told to remove the pottery from the sidewalk, and to stop parking illegally next to the utility pole on Market Street.

The city claimed:

Nor is there any evidence that the Mayor had any part in having the pottery removed from the sidewalk . . . . Betty Stigler was not told by the Mayor to make [the] Granthams remove [their] pottery . . . . Mayor McAdams . . . received complaints about the pottery on the sidewalk but never told the Community Development department to have it removed . . . .

Instead, the evidence shows that the Mayor received complaints about the Granthams' parking and sidewalk displays. . . but she did not request any specific action be taken against the Granthams. As to the sidewalk display, Betty Stigler simply attempted to enforce the sidewalk ordinance as she did with other businesses within the City . . . and she did so without citing or fining the Granthams.

Simply put, the Granthams have no evidence that any action was taken because of speech that occurred more than a year prior rather than their violations of law which resulted in complaints made to the Mayor's office. . . . This defeats their claim.

In summary, the city asserted that:

The Granthams do not have any evidence that any action was taken by Mayor McAdams or Betty Stigler with the intent of hurting their business, without right or justifiable cause or with malice, or that actually damaged their business.

Interestingly, the Granthams' attorney James H. Powell III did not propound any discovery requests nor depose any witnesses on their behalf.

The docket sheet shows that the Granthams never even filed an answer to the city's Motion for Summary Judgment.

These facts indicate that the Granthams were ready to throw in the towel when the city filed its motion for summary judgment.

And indeed, on October 26, 2023, all the parties requested the court to dismiss the complaint, including any claims by the city for attorney fees against the Granthams. The joint request for dismissal may be seen here: Joint Stipulation of Dismissal

The court's order dismissing the case may be seen here: Order of Dismissal

Because this case has been dismissed, we may never find out whether the law against sidewalk displays is being selectively enforced, as the Granthams' claimed.

John Pittman Hey
The Taxpayers Channel

News Flash Archive