Maggie Valley responds to former chief's lawsuit
Russ Gilliland. File photo
Two months after former Maggie Valley Police Chief Russ Gilliland filed a lawsuit against the town for wrongful termination, the town has responded by requesting either a dismissal or a jury trial.
The initial suit, filed on Gilliland’s behalf by Charlotte attorney Michael Elliot, claims the former police chief’s firing last year was retaliatory and that it caused damage to his reputation, causing him to be “effectively stripped of his career in law-enforcement.” It also claims that Gilliland had an “exemplary record.”
“He was trusted, reliable, and knowledgeable, and in more than twenty years in law enforcement — including nearly twenty years in Maggie Valley — he never had a disciplinary issue or reprimand, and consistently earned excellent performance evaluations, prior to the events described below,” the suit reads.
The suit further alleges that when Vickie Best was promoted from Maggie Valley town clerk to town manager, Gilliland’s performance was “baselessly questioned for the first time.” This allegedly began when Gilliland investigated the criminal activity of Best’s son, Thomas Medford, who according to the suit was “well known in the area for being involved in criminal activity, specifically as a habitual user of narcotics, and as having a propensity for violence.”
On Jan. 13, 2023, about two weeks after Best got the nod to go from interim town manager to gaining the job permanently, officers were called to her residence for a domestic disturbance, investigating an allegation that she had been assaulted by her son.
“When the officers arrived, they discovered handgun ammunition and blood on the living room floor and in the bedroom of the residence,” the suit reads. “The officers also noted drug paraphernalia in the residence. The son had left the scene, but the Town Manager was still present. She denied any assault had occurred, refused to cooperate with any investigation and eventually, the officers left the scene without taking any formal action.”
Related Items
'Sounds of the Season'
Sign up for night skiing at Cataloochee
Pactiv merger leaves questions about Canton mill site
WNC skier shares love of sport with family, community
According to the suit, Gilliland became concerned that a full and proper search of the residence hadn’t been conducted, that the assault hadn’t been fully investigated and “the actions of officers on the scene could be perceived of as showing favoritism towards the Town Manager.”
Gilliland met with Medford to talk and eventually gained consent to search his residence, allegedly finding a marijuana pipe.
He seized the items and logged them into evidence at the police station. The suit claims that shortly thereafter, Gilliland had a conversation with his captain, Matthew Boger — who is now the chief — and expressed concerns a full investigation wasn’t pursued, especially considering Medford’s history of violent crimes, a pattern that could worsen over time if left unchecked.
“Over the following two months, Officer Gilliland noted a sharp turn in the Town Manager’s attitude towards him,” the suit reads. “Specifically, she was cold and hostile to him, largely ignored him when he spoke, and seemed angry with him. Additionally, she left him out of certain meetings and excluded him from a project in which he should have played a part.”
On April 10, 2023, Best requested a meeting with Gilliland, during which she read a number of concerns related to his performance. The suit claims it was the first time anyone had questioned his performance or leadership. A week later, Gilliland was suspended pending an investigation, and a month after that, he received his termination letter.
Throughout the response to the suit, filed on the town’s behalf by attorney Adam F. Peoples of the law firm Hall Booth Smith out of Asheville, it is noted that contrary to Gilliland’s claim that he had an exemplary performance record, he in fact was fired due to “inadequate performance.” The response says in several places that there is ample documentation to back that claim.
Perhaps most noteworthy, the response from the town notes that in an EEOC complaint, Gilliland claimed that age discrimination was the driving force behind his termination.
“In his Complaint, the Plaintiff does not make any allegations whatsoever regarding age or discrimination,” the town’s response reads. “To the extent the Plaintiff intends to reserve other potential causes of action arising out of his termination, including but not limited to alleging age discrimination, those claims should be barred.”
Ultimately, Peoples moved to dismiss the claim against the town; however, it also said if the case is not dismissed that there should be a trial where all the facts can be laid out before a jury.
