Brandon Ortiz's story from the Herald Leader focuses again of the behavior of those closely associated or related to members on our state's highest court. This story is about an internal appeal of a fired employee who claimed that the oldest son of
Supreme Court Justice Will T. Scott was given preferential treatment
when promoted in January.
The state court system rejected Wednesday the internal appeal of a fired employee who claimed that the oldest son of Supreme Court Justice Will T. Scott was given preferential treatment when promoted in January.
The appeal was filed by fired Administrative Office of the Courts employee Ruth Combs, a pre-trial officer whose employment record includes three disciplinary probations since 1995. She questioned the promotion of the Pikeville justice's oldest son, Andrew H. Scott, 32, to her former job.
The case, which the AOC refused to make public, marked the second time that Andrew Scott was accused of being improperly promoted.
According to Wednesday's decision, written by retired Justice James E. Keller, Combs' appeal had accused Justice Scott of conspiring with AOC Director Jason Nemes to give the younger Scott a supervisor job in Perry County.
A three-person AOC appeals board said Combs' claim of favoritism had ”no merit whatsoever,“ but recommended reinstatement because the evidence used to justify her firing was presented after her termination.
Keller overturned the board's recommendation that Combs get her job back. Combs was fired in January.
Andrew Scott was first hired as a pre-trial officer on Aug. 16, 2005, according to personnel records supplied by the AOC.
Pre-trial officers are court employees responsible for interviewing defendants in jail and providing information to judges so they can set bond. They also monitor compliance for defendants on pre-trial release.
On May 1, 2007, he was promoted to supervisor, a job that paid $30,576. But barely three weeks later, Scott was demoted, AOC records show. He was allowed to keep his $2,784 a year pay raise.
On Wednesday night, Scott denied ever being demoted. He declined further comment.
Andrew Scott's demotion was the result of another appeal, said Prestonburg attorney Ned Pillersdorf, who represents Combs.
Pillersdorf said Andrew Scott, who had less than two years experience as a pre-trial officer, was promoted over a veteran pre-trial officer with 18 years experience.
He declined to identify the officer, but records from Combs' appeal shows that it is Tamara Van Hoose, who works in Magoffin County.
Van Hoose filed an administrative complaint in April 2007 when she heard rumors that Scott would be promoted over her, Pillersdorf said.
Internal administrative appeals are not public record because the court system is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act. AOC also refused to release Scott's application for employment.
Documents in the case were given to the Herald-Leader by Combs' attorneys, Pillersdorf and Joe Childers of Lexington.
Pillersdorf is the husband of former Supreme Court Justice Janet L. Stumbo. Scott defeated Stumbo for re-election to the Supreme Court in 2004 after a contentious campaign. Stumbo is now a Court of Appeals judge.
In May, Will T. Scott, Andrew Scott and Nemes denied allegations of wrongdoing to the Herald-Leader.
”This is a political vendetta, but it comes with the job and I understand that,“ Will T. Scott said.
Replied Pillersdorf, ”I have a political vendetta against anyone who violates the rights of my clients.
”I got into this case because two employees of AOC came to me because they did not get a promotion because of Scott and Nemes,“ Pillersdorf said. ”And Ms. Combs is basically being fired, and, in my view, to allow Will Scott's son to get preferential treatment.“
Scott was promoted, again, from pre-trial officer to a pre-trial supervisor on Jan. 1., this time in Perry County.
According to an appeal letter written by Pillersdorf, Andrew Scott allegedly told a court system employee, Jim Marcum, that he got an earlier promotion after his father met with Nemes.
But Marcum, when reached in May, denied ever making such a statement. He repeated his denial at a hearing in June, according to Wednesday's decision.
Andrew Scott originally agreed to an interview request with the Herald-Leader in May. But he changed his mind after speaking with AOC lawyers.
”Because of the ongoing legal issues surrounding a confidential personnel matter of which you are aware, the AOC Office of General Counsel has advised me that it is inappropriate to speak to the media at this time except to say that I have never asked my father to intercede on my behalf regarding employment with the Administrative Office of the Courts,“ Scott said in a statement released by AOC. ”Any statements to the contrary are inaccurate.“
Nemes said he was not aware of Andrew Scott's promotion until Combs filed the appeal. ”I didn't know that he got this job until this appeals stuff came on,“ Nemes said. ”Did he get the job because he's Scott's son? The answer is, to my knowledge, no. I don't know if a supervisor made a decision, but it certainly didn't come up to me like that. He got the job because he's qualified for the job.“
On Dec. 1, 2007, Combs accepted a voluntary demotion, according to personnel records.
On Jan. 1, Andrew Scott was promoted to Combs' supervisor position and got another raise. He made $34,836 a year as of May. Combs was then fired Jan. 22.
Childers, one of Combs' attorneys, said she took a demotion because she felt she was being harassed by supervisors. She was planning on retiring in May.
Will T. Scott said his son got the promotion on his own.
”Whatever Andrew does or gets in pre-trial services, he has to earn. I mean, that's just the way I am,“ Scott said.
According to letters filed in Combs' appeal, she was accused of misinforming Perry Circuit Court Judge William Engle III about the status of a defendant's drug tests.
Engle told the Herald-Leader that he's not aware of ever being misled by Combs. But he also acknowledged to the appeals board that he did not double-check her work.
Engle said he was satisfied with her performance and had never complained to the Administrative Office of the Courts.
According to the appeals board decision, Combs was also accused of falsifying drug tests and attempting to get a man out of jail for violating the conditions of his pre-trial release. Once he was released, Andrew Scott said, he saw the man eating dinner with Combs.
Combs, hired in May 1984, does not have a clean employment record. According to personnel records released by AOC, she received a three-month disciplinary probation and two-day suspension in 1995. She signed a letter of understanding in 2002 and was put on six months disciplinary probation in 2003.
She received a written reprimand in 2004, and another six months disciplinary probation that year. In 2006, she was put on six months disciplinary probation and was suspended three days. She was put on another six months probation again in 2007.
The records do not state why she was disciplined.
The appeals board recommended reinstating Combs because the evidence against her was presented after her termination. But Keller, who was asked to review the case because Nemes recused himself, said the AOC was justified in continuing its investigation of Combs after her termination. He said the evidence against her and her past employment history were reason enough to fire her.
The decision is the final word in the administrative appeal process. But Combs has the right to appeal the decision to circuit court. Childers said she has not decided yet whether she will appeal.
