Legal efforts to reclaim adminstrator’s job ends

0
797

For Michael Cunningham

By Stan Welch

The seemingly endless battle by former Anderson County administrator Michael Cunningham to reclaim that job came to an end, as the South Carolina Supreme Court declined to review its own decision earlier this year to deny Cunningham’s original appeal. The decision leaves Cunningham with no further avenues of recourse.

The Court reversed an earlier ruling by the appellate court, which had in turn reversed the original decision by summary court Judge Alex MacCaulay. MacCaulay had ruled in favor of the County’s position on all counts in the original ruling. Cunningham subsequently prevailed on the issue of wrongful termination in the appellate court; but the County, despite a split Council and considerable controversy, voted to take the fight to the state Supreme Court.

The origins of the case lie in the actions taken during a November 18, 2008 Council meeting, during which the lame duck Council approved a $1.2 million severance package for administrator Joey Preston; followed immediately by the hiring of Cunningham to fill the job. Early in 2009, when the new Council was installed, they quickly voided the contract and offered Cunningham a different arrangement, minus the generous severance provisions and employment protections included in the original contract.

Cunningham declined the offer, and was subsequently terminated by a majority vote of the Council. He then filed a lawsuit alleging breach of contract, wrongful discharge, and violation of the Payment of Wages Act. As stated, Judge Alex MacCaulay ruled in favor of the County, and the long legal battle was joined.

Cunningham’s case, with fewer political implications, moved rather languidly through the courts. Over the course of the litigation, the makeup of the County Council has changed completely, except for the presence of Councilwomen Cindy Wilson and Gracie Floyd. Finally, in a decision filed on September 2, the Supreme Court reversed the appellate court’s ruling that Cunningham had been wrongfully discharged.

Chief Justice Jean Toal concurred with the dissent which Justice Beatty authored, but it was not enough to prevail. Cunningham’s attorneys asked the Supreme Court to rehear arguments, but their request was denied, bringing the lengthy litigation to an end.