Suit: Defense Conspired to Let Ferentz Win $1.7M Judgment

WEST WILDWOOD – Former West Wildwood Mayor Herbert “Chuck” Frederick filed suit in Superior Court against Mayor Christopher Fox, Police Chief Jacquelyn Ferentz, and others who, he said, conspired to throw a lawsuit against the borough in Ferentz’s favor and then set out on a years-long campaign to harass Frederick, blaming him for the burden the lawsuit caused to taxpayers. 
In 2017, Ferentz won a $1.7 million jury verdict in a whistleblower suit against the borough, which was not covered by insurance, after the Joint Insurance Fund (JIF) successfully argued in court that the borough violated a “cooperation clause” and did not adequately defend itself.
In the complaint filed by Frederick Sep. 30, one quoted observer likened that trial to “two quarterbacks getting together on Saturday night to fix the Sunday game.” 
In a 2018 decision, Superior Court Judge James H. Pickering Jr. ruled that the JIF was not liable to cover the jury award. In the opinion, he called West Wildwood’s argument that the JIF should pay “fantasy,” and said of the borough’s trial strategy that “there is no attorney living, dying or dead who could win with that defense.” 
Frederick alleges he was unfairly blamed for causing the financial burden the jury award caused borough taxpayers and was subjected to harassment since Fox was reelected mayor, in 2012. West Wildwood has a population under 600, with a budget of $2.9 million. 
“If you read the judge’s opinion and you read my complaint, you can be nothing but appalled,” said Daniel McElhatton, a Philadelphia attorney representing Frederick in the suit, in a phone call with the Herald. 
Mary D’Arcy Bittner, West Wildwood solicitor; Louis Barbone, the trial lawyer who defended the borough in Ferentz’s lawsuit; Michelle Douglass, Ferentz’s attorney; Christopher Ridings, former West Wildwood business administrator; Scott Golden, commissioner; Cornelius Maxwell, former commissioner; and the borough of West Wildwood are also named parties in the suit. 
Frederick, who was elected mayor, in 2008, suffered a near-fatal accident, in 2011, causing him not to seek reelection, in 2012, the complaint says. Fox was mayor from 1996-2008. 
After an unsuccessful recall election attempt in 2010, Fox won the election in 2012, then reinstated Ferentz, with whom he resides, to the West Wildwood Police Department. Soon after, Fox gave her a promotion to chief and a raise, despite a state hearing officer determining Ferentz was culpable of the charges that led to her dismissal under Frederick, it is alleged in the complaint.
Ferentz filed two lawsuits, saying her rights were violated and she was wrongfully terminated, the complaint says, adding, “this litigation was manipulated by the borough and its counsel, Bittner, Fox, Golden, Maxwell, Ridings and Douglas, counsel for Ferentz, in a blatant effort to secure a monetary reward for Ferentz.”
Ferentz settled one lawsuit, for wrongful termination, with the borough but had the second whistleblower suit outstanding. The terms of the settlement and various resolutions that were approved at public meetings that followed “bargained away” the borough’s defense, attorneys for the borough’s insurance company successfully argued before Pickering. 
Frederick was dropped from the suit during discovery, after attorneys presented evidence from state pension records to Ferentz’s lawyer, showing a basis for her dismissal, the complaint says. Dropping Frederick meant he would not be deposed and only called as a witness at trial if the plaintiff or defense elected to put him on the stand. 
According to the complaint, a resolution drafted by Ferentz’s lawyers was passed at a public meeting, prohibiting evidence from the disciplinary hearing that led to her dismissal to be used against her at trial.
In an email exchange between Bittner and Robert DeSanto, a lawyer for the borough on wrongful termination lawsuits, quoted in Pickering’s decision, DeSanto advises Bittner that by not opposing a motion for summary judgment in the termination suit, it opens the borough to adverse consequences in the whistleblower suit. 
Bittner responded that she agrees and said she presented several options to commissioners to handle the issue without compromising the borough’s defense against the whistleblower claim. She stated she had the commissioners initial the proposals as they rejected them.
Frederick’s suit claims Bittner violated her fiduciary duty to the borough by incorporating such restrictive language into a resolution drafted by Ferentz’s attorney. Bittner did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 
The complaint alleges this “handcuffed and severely handicap” any defense by the borough to Ferentz’s suit, making the trial a “sham.” Pickering stated, in his decision absolving JIF of liability, “This court finds the defense bargained away by WWW (West Wildwood) was viable and valid.”
Barbone did not call Frederick as a witness in the borough’s defense and, according to Pickering’s decision, argued it would have been a bad strategy to do so. 
Douglass previously told the Herald, “I didn’t call him (Frederick). I didn’t want to call him, and the other side didn’t call him.” Douglass did not respond to requests for comment. 
Frederick did not testify to the jury about the reasons for firing Ferentz and this, with the other excluded evidence supporting Ferentz’s dismissal, allowed “for an inevitable win for Ferentz and a fraud against the people of the Borough of West Wildwood, and indeed against the courts of the State of New Jersey,” the complaint states. 
Barbone did not make the trial judge aware of the restrictions the resolution created, the complaint alleges. 
Barbone, in an email exchange with the Herald, called the accusations “baseless,” saying he will be filing a motion for dismissal. He stated there is “no cause of action based on an attorney’s advocacy in court,” adding that he entered the case long after it had been filed, Frederick dropped, and discovery concluded. 
Barbone also stated, “The fact of the charges and hearing officer was introduced at trial. The resolutions were all done by the govt long before trial in public at govt meetings. There was no basis to exclude adopted resolutions at trial.” 
The complaint also alleges Barbone never attempted to impeach Ferentz, using her status as a so-called “Brady witness,” a list kept by the Cape May County prosecutor of law enforcement officers with something in their past that will cause credibility issues for them in a trial. 
Barbone refutes this claim, telling the Herald, “I also raised the Brady issue in examining Ferentz at trial. Just wrong that jury was unaware.”
The complaint alleges that Frederick suffered harassment, severe emotional distress, and mental anguish, loss of personal and business reputation, and financial detriment. 
Fox and his supporters engaged in “a series of actions designed to harass, intimidate and threaten Frederick, another commissioner and citizens who had supported Frederick,” the complaint alleges.
The alleged harassment included taking down monuments, plaques, and acknowledgments of public action taken by Frederick for the overall benefit of West Wildwood, according to the complaint, as well as reporting him for violations of various codes and regulations, which, upon inspection, were withdrawn. 
Frederick is seeking compensatory damages and wants the defendants who hold positions in the borough to be removed. According to McElhatton, Frederick wants “justice.”
To contact Shay Roddy, email sroddy@cmcherald.com.