Former Montezuma County Deputy Clerk Tammy Neely dropped her lawsuit in lieu of a settlement against Montezuma County last month.
The suit alleged that County Clerk Carol Tullis and the county violated her First and 14th Amendment rights when she was demoted from her position as chief deputy clerk following the November 2010 election in which she opposed Tullis.
According to the settlement agreement, Neely will receive $11,210 in past wages and another $23,790 to settle her claims for compensatory damage for a total amount of $35,000.
Another $35,000 was paid to the Zakhem Law Trust Account for attorney fees and costs, bringing the overall total to $70,000.
In addition, the county will provide Neely with a positive letter of reference for future employment. She also was ordered to resign and to never seek employment again from the county. All parties agreed that no comments would be made to the media concerning the settlement that was approved last month by the Montezuma County Commission.
On Aug. 6, the commission approved the settlement that stated the amount would be $70,000 with $40,000 of the amount being paid by Trident Insurance and the other $30,000 being paid by the county with the understanding Neely would resign her position with the county.
Neely signed the agreement on Aug. 9.
The agreement also stipulated that Neely must be paid the $35,000 within 15 days from Aug. 9.
The settlement agreement also states that nothing in the document constitutes an admission by the county of any wrongdoing involving Neelys claims.
Neely, according to the agreement, acknowledged that she received good and sufficient consideration for her execution of the agreement, specifically including but not limited to her release of the claims.
Neelys lawsuit had been filed in U.S. District Court in Denver on Aug. 5, 2010, and sought the reinstatement of Neelys former position of chief deputy city clerk, compensatory damages against the county and compensatory and punitive damages against Tullis individually.
According to the paperwork filed in district court, Tullis informed Neely she was being terminated on Nov. 3, 2010, the day after the election. On Nov. 4, Tullis contacted Neely by phone and stated in lieu of termination, Neely could stay on in the clerks office as deputy clerk instead of the chief deputy clerk which she accepted.
The county, back in 2011, denied the allegations and raised certain defenses, and despite the settlement, continues to deny any liability in this matter.
According to the paperwork before the settlement was reached, Neely and her attorneys requested a jury trial on all claims and sought injunctive relief in the form of restoration of her former employment and compensatory damages against the county; compensatory and punitive damages against Tullis in her individual capacity; and award of plaintiffs reasonable attorneys fees and costs of this action against all defendants as well as any additional relief the court deemed just and proper.
[email protected]
