Who will pay $475,000 judgment in Clayton?

In the wake of a $475,000 judgment against outgoing Clayton County Sheriff Victor Hill, lawyers are preparing to battle over where the money will come from.

The U.S. District Court jury’s award was announced Monday and holds Hill responsible for the January 2005 false arrest of Mark Tuggle, the brother of Hill’s predecessor. The jury dismissed Tuggle’s claim of malicious prosecution.

Clayton Commission Chairman Eldrin Bell said he hopes to limit the county’s exposure.

“We intend to ask for a reduction in the judgment,” Clayton Commission Chairman Eldrin Bell said Tuesday. “And we are also asking our attorneys if there are areas where the county does not have to be responsible in this and we want those areas identified.”

Tuggle’s attorney, Bill Atkins, said he expects county commissioners to balk at the payout.

“The county has been living under the mistaken notion they can walk away from this because he’s a state official,” Atkins said. “But they never raised that defense and the judge told the jury that Hill was a county official.” Atkins said he’ll also seek more than $100,000 in attorneys fees from the county.

When Hill succeeded Stanley Tuggle in January 2005, he fired 27 deputies the first day. Those workers were reinstated within days but sued Hill for wrongful termination. That suit was settled last summer for about $7 million.

Bell said the settlement exhausted the county’s insurance coverage.

“The taxpayers have suffered extensively, given these 2005 activities that were created by the sheriff,” Bell said. “We are totally out of insurance money. All monies paid out in this case will have to come from the general fund. We’re going to search very carefully to see where and how to protect our taxpayers.”

Hill’s term ends Dec. 31, but there are several federal lawsuits still pending against him.

Hill’s attorney, James E. Dearing Jr. of Atlanta, who is paid by the county, said he thinks Hill’s public persona hurt the sheriff. in the latest case.

“I just don’t think the facts showed that the sheriff had any direct involvement in Mr. Tuggle’s arrest or had any malice toward him,” said Dearing. “For three and a half years, Sheriff Hill has been a very newsworthy figure and I think that was more on trial here.”

Dearing said he is concerned that the jury twice said it was deadlocked. He said he asked for a mistrial both times.

“I think the jury had trouble with the facts of the case and the version that was being told,” he said. “I have concerns that the jurors might have felt forced to reach an agreement.”

Hill has not decided whether to appeal, Dearing said.

Mark Tuggle called Hill’s office twice Jan. 3, 2005, to ask for a meeting with him to discuss the firings, and referred to Hill as a “short little (expletive)” in one and “lowdown scum” in the second. Hill said his staff considered the name-calling a threat so Tuggle was arrested for harassing phone calls.

But the Clayton State Court Solicitor General did not find the calls threatening and the case was dismissed seven months later. Tuggle filed the civil suit in February 2006.

Meanwhile, speculation that Hill has essentially stopped working since his reelection defeat prompted Gov. Sonny Perdue to name a three-person panel to investigate. Hill hasn’t commented, but his chief deputy, John Gibson, this week said his boss is doing “business as usual.”