The Vermont Supreme Court has thrown out a $605,000 jury award to the former head of the Springfield prison, who was fired in 2017.
The high court ruled that the state’s whistleblower protection law didn’t apply to Mark Potanas because the concerns he raised about spending and care related to “potential” matters that had yet to happen.
“To be afforded protection under the Act, the law plainly requires that an employee report that a person or entity ‘has engaged . . . in waste,’” the Supreme Court decision issued Friday stated. “That requirement was not satisfied here.”
The ruling added, “Under the law, one must have a good-faith belief that waste ‘has’ occurred.”
Justice Harold Eaton authored the opinion which was supported by Chief Justice Paul Reiber and Justice Karen Carroll. Justice Nancy Waples, according to a footnote to the ruling, took part in hearing oral arguments but did not participate in the decision. No reason was given.
Justice William Cohen issued a dissenting opinion.
“In my view,” he wrote, “this conclusion severely chills an employee’s ability to report the extent to which conduct or inaction will threaten the safety of the public, other state employees, or persons under the state’s care.”
Alison Bell, an attorney for Potanas, said Monday she was disappointed with the ruling.
“We’re reviewing the decision, but typically the Vermont Supreme Court has the final say,” she said.
Haley Sommer, a spokesperson for the corrections department, stated in an email Monday, “The Department of Corrections fully agrees with the holding of the Vermont Supreme Court in this case, but we have no further comment at this time.”
Potanas was fired in 2017 as the superintendent of the Southern State Correctional Facility after the Department of Corrections said it found he pressured a mental health staffer to place an incarcerated individual into solitary confinement in the prison.
In his lawsuit, Potanas contended that his firing was a “pretext” to remove him because he had been vocal about mismanagement of the department and had gone over the head of his supervisor.
Potanas had been a corrections officer for more than decade before being named superintendent of the Springfield prison in 2011, the lawsuit stated, and had repeatedly raised concerns about a third-party contractor not fulfilling its obligations in providing mental health care or meeting the needs of incarcerated individuals.
In addition, according to the lawsuit, he also raised complaints about funding in 2016, when a construction crew came to the prison to fix leaky pipes that were causing mold.
Potanas, according to the lawsuit, wanted to keep the crew on longer to finish the last building, saving time by preventing the crew from needing to come back later.
Denied by the corrections commissioner’s office, the lawsuit stated, Potanas later asked and got approval from the state finance commissioner to keep the crew on.
The incident leading to the state’s case in firing Potanas came weeks later, according to the lawsuit. That’s when one of the facility’s mental health staffers filed a report against Potanas, claiming that he pressured the staffer to change the status of an incarcerated individual to allow the person to be placed in solitary confinement.
According to a letter from the state that was included in court documents, that mental health clinician recommended that the person in question, identified in the document as E.C., should not be placed in solitary confinement or “segregation” for discipline because it could be detrimental to his health.
The clinician said Potanas yelled at her and forced her to change E.C.’s designation, the letter said, and the clinician reported feeling threatened by Potanas’ behavior.
Potanas, in his lawsuit, claimed his firing was actually retaliation for acting as a whistleblower about the prison’s conditions.
Following a trial in January 2023, a Washington County Superior civil court jury returned a verdict in Potanas’ favor, concluding that he was terminated in retaliation for protected activity and awarding him $605,000 in damages.
The corrections department appealed the verdict, arguing that Potanas did not engage in any “protected activity” under the State Employee Whistleblower Act and as a result the trial court should have granted its request for judgment as a matter of law.
In siding with the corrections department, the Supreme Court called for the jury verdict to be vacated and judgment to be entered for the department.
Read the story on VTDigger here: Vermont Supreme Court tosses out verdict that awarded $600k to fired prison superintendent.