At 9:06AM this morning Judge Maureen McIntyre called the case of Lowen v. Board of Fire and Police Commissioners.
She looked around the courtroom for lawyers to approach the bench. Seeing none, she handed some papers to her clerk.
I thought, “That’s it? Where are the lawyers?”
Here’s a case that was filed a year ago over a trivial, but legal, issue. And no lawyers are here?
After a few minutes I asked the bailiff if I could read the Decision. While he was finishing other business, I spotted a familiar face and, a few minutes later, left the courtroom and watched a hallway conversation between Sgt. Steve Gorski, his father and one of his attorneys.
What did Judge McIntyre decide in this case that was filed a year ago? You may recall the issue. The Woodstock Board of Fire and Police Commissioners told Chief Lowen that he had not made his case. Sgt. Gorski’s lawyer asked for a directed verdict in Gorski’s favor. And that’s what the Board decided.
Apparently, the City’s attorney did not object at the time. But they figured out later that they might make a case for the Board’s having made its decision in, in their opinion, an incorrect manner. And so they filed for an Administrative Review.
OK, so the judge sided with them. What does this mean?
The case goes back to the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners. The Board has already heard the chief’s case. The chief rested his case a year ago. He should not have any opportunity to present more testimony or information. He’s all done.
Where will the Board pick up? Right before its decision to issue a directed verdict? What will it do? The Board could call Sgt. Steve Gorski, and then he has choices. He could say he has nothing to say. The Board has heard the chief’s case. It should decide exactly as it did before. And the Board could rule that the City is to pay Sgt. Gorski all his back pay. It’s not just one year’s back pay; now it is TWO years’ back pay.
Or Sgt. Gorski could testify. He could provide his name and rank and then say he has nothing further to offer. And the Board will make the same decision.
Or he could re-state the facts of the case and how he was placed in a Catch 22 situation when he was required to sign a statement presented by the chief that said he could not take certain medications but he COULD take any drugs prescribed by his doctors! Now, just how do you do that? And if you do take drugs prescribed by your doctors but they happen to be on the chief’s Don’t Take list, you’re in deep manure. And that's just where he found himself.
How quickly will the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners meet? They must give 48 hours’ notice, so they could meet on Friday at 5:00PM and finish off this matter.
By the way, the Board should order the Police Department and the City of Woodstock to reinstate Gorski’s health insurance which, I understand, the City canceled in October!
What a great way to treat a 19-year employee who has suffered two on-the-job injuries!!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
What's the deal with these chiefs and sheriffs who think that they are doctors and know better than anyone else. Can the public look thru their medical records, I bet we could find some things. The board should give Gorski his job ,back pay, benefits, and some extra for damages. Enough of this BS.
There are more than just a few who agree with you, Gene. They don't want to stick their heads up out of the holes, though. Might get 'em lopped off, don't you know.
And the Saga continues for Sgt. Gorski; deep pockets and half truths and inuendo and more time to financially weaken him verus the Sgt. who has sustained two work related injuries and two required spine fusion surgeries that were performed because of the injuries sustained in the line of duty during the course of 20 years of service to the Police Department and the citizens of Woodstock Illinois.
I also wonder if the Woodstock City Council has been told the "backstory" as they say in the news business about the real reason why the Chief of Police Lowen continues to prosecute this civil matter to the extent that it has gone.
I know as fact that at least one city council member was told that Sgt. Gorski refused to return to work; the true story being that when he called and talked to the deputy chief about returning to administrative duties he was told to not even bother to come in because they did not have anything like that for him even though in the past provisions where made for
previous officers.
After 20 years of service and an unblemished service record is it right...to be discarded like a chewing gum wrapper. I wonder what a jury of 12 blue collar hard working Americans would think about that treatment.
Eventually, and for as long as it takes we will pursue the truth in this matter until the subtrefuge and smoke and mirrors are cleared away and the real truth shines through.
Post a Comment