Sheriff Jeff Hollowell files a $20 million government tort claim with Inyo County

Inyo County Sheriff Jeff Hollowell

Sierra Wave News has confirmed that Inyo County Sheriff Jeff Hollowell filed a $20 million government tort claim with Inyo County. A press release from Perez Law Offices in Sacramento says the following:

The Sheriff of Inyo County, Jeffrey Hollowell, elected on June 5, 2018 and took office July 13, 2018, has filed a $20,000,000 Government Tort Claim against the County of Inyo. This action was taken in connection with the illegal release of confidential records, libel and slander, and arises from the actions of the Deputy Director of Personnel, her nephew former county employee Reuben Bradley, and former county employee Joshua Nicholson.

“A Government Tort Claim is something that precedes the filing of a lawsuit which will be filed in the United States District Court shortly,” stated his attorney, Anthony M. Perez of Sacramento, California. “The County of Inyo has 45-days to accept, reject or avoid responding,” Perez said.

“This is a unique, disgraceful and outrageous case with strong evidence supporting Sheriff Hollowell’s claims,” Perez added.

 

, ,

23 Responses to Sheriff Jeff Hollowell files a $20 million government tort claim with Inyo County

  1. Shauna cant get police report when vigilante board member neighbor tried to run her over with a dozer on her property February 11, 2021 at 10:42 am #

    I agree with cleaning house..if youve ever had to deal with Any county dept that you dont have a “Friend” in than youre profiled right when you walk through the door- or they walk through yours… Planning and the sheriffs being the worst. I get wanting to sue inyo county. Many of us have a federal civil rights case in the bag but not the courage or money to pursue it.But for the sheriff ( who has done Nothing to put his officers and dept in check) to sue for that much because now he might be profiled is a (bleepin) JOKE! These county employees have become too comfortable in their positions and have made themselves untouchable and moreover unaccountable for their actions- or inactions.

     
  2. Upon Review... February 9, 2021 at 8:04 am #

    If the Sheriff is so emotionally distressed over the County’s alleged misconduct that he needs $20 million to get through the day he should resign immediately, as being unfit for duty.

     
  3. Again?! February 8, 2021 at 8:30 pm #

    No new ideas in Hollywood. I mean, this Sheriff Dorsey reboot has a couple of new elements, but my money is on it eventually having the same ending.

     
  4. Sami February 8, 2021 at 12:49 pm #

    Hollowell continuing to demonstrate that he has no intention to serve the people of this county.

     
  5. G-Man February 8, 2021 at 10:40 am #

    Is Inyo County self insured?
    This could be a problem!

     
  6. Stoopid is Stoopid does February 5, 2021 at 10:23 am #

    Clearly the individual who released the info did so with the intention to cause harm. What I want to know is surely there must be a process in which individuals who apply for positions such as those involving both law enforcement and or veterans affairs, would at the very least, have to go through some kind of screening before being employed? No background check was ever conducted to make sure the information on his application could be verified prior? No one ever questioned his qualifications at any time during the past 15yrs?

     
  7. Thomas February 3, 2021 at 9:07 pm #

    Hello, Abstract; It isn’t necessarily the case that an insurer will be bearing the whole loss, if it comes to that. This is because it isn’t always the case that municipalities or counties will have high limits liability coverage in force. It becomes too expensive in terms of premium costs to do so, consequently public entities will frequently buy an initial layer of coverage, to get the defense costs covered plus an initial layer of protection, then they will frequently elect to self-insure the higher exposure levels. Over time this can save much in premiums, with the reasoning being that the higher levels would seldom if ever be called upon. So the insurer who writes that first layer will defend and pay on a judgment, but above that, a public entity may be left exposed.

    Also, the details of the insuring clause of the policy will become important — the carrier will have typically underwritten the risk for negligence claims, and sometimes a carrier will exclude liability coverage for intentional criminal acts by a public employee. Whether or not such an exclusion is applicable can become an issue in some cases. In those cases, unless there is something more, such as defalcating employee coverage, there might be a gap in coverage. In such cases, what typically happens is the insurer tenders a defense with a reservation of rights, and deferring the substantive coverage determination for later resolution.

    It can become quite complex and it is very unfortunate for the entity and for all the parties involved when circumstances cause such litigation to take place.

     
  8. Wow February 3, 2021 at 12:55 pm #

    It is really too bad. There are a lot of great employees at Inyo County who are very dedicated in their service to the public, keep their heads down and get the job done. More often than not on a shoestring and at the expense of their own families. So unfortunate that this ego cagematch of the incompetent leadership is dragging all of them through the mud and forcing them to live in fear.

     
  9. Echo Sierra February 3, 2021 at 12:37 pm #

    Elected officials employment and military records are and should be available to the public under the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA). You wouldn’t file a lawsuit if you had nothing to hide.
    https://militarycorruption.com/hollowell/

     
    • Dean February 3, 2021 at 2:48 pm #

      After reading the article, I hope to hear a response.

       
    • VillageWitch February 4, 2021 at 6:26 am #

      Echo Sierra, I am not a fan of Mr. Hollowell but this article does not state any facts. It is completely bias and includes words like probably, in my opinion and other phrases that make the article totally unbelievable. It’s a joke.

       
  10. Dean February 3, 2021 at 11:50 am #

    Does the deputy director of personnel still have her job? Seems that sharing personal and confidential information should be grounds for dismissal. If proven true, of course,

     
  11. B. Park February 3, 2021 at 8:44 am #

    Maybe he knows he isn’t going to win election so he’s starting (deleted)?
    I recently had a hearing he attended along with a couple of other county employees, the letters of evidence did not match the statement to an OFFICER they over looked everything. Total (deleted) show of course they ruled against me and my animal. It just shows how crooked our county and system can be, especial notifying someone less than 3 business days before a hearing.

     
    • FishinDay395 February 3, 2021 at 5:06 pm #

      I think when “county property” is misused or exploited by an irresponsible act or person whether it be a physical item or said animal, action should be taken by the owner (The County or Sheriff) to remove the possibility of future exploitation or misuse to prevent liability. In this case which I think we all know too well two people in the wrong don’t make it a right. Furthermore the exploitation of the misuse of the county property on social media by irresponsible parties and their family members makes the misuse of the “County Property” and the attempt to defend it even more of a displayed (Deleted) show.

       
  12. InyoArabians February 3, 2021 at 7:26 am #

    So our sheriff makes a big display about refusing to enforce health directives meant to prevent serious disease and death. A former deputy is fired and runs around the county spreading false accusations. Then another county employee furnishes confidential personnel records to her family and friends?

    Sounds like it’s time to clean house from top to bottom. They’re all bozos on this bus.

     
  13. Paying for Jeff's Lawsuit February 3, 2021 at 6:35 am #

    Let me get this straight. This elected official is suing the county over something that his employees did through and FOIA request? And now he feels that each one of his constituents owes him $1112.53 each? Between this and what our local veterans have to say about him does not look to good for his campaign.

     
  14. Marcellus von Hamlet February 3, 2021 at 6:03 am #

    Bravo Sheriff Hollowell!

    Shakespeare seems so often to have said it best:

    “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.”

     
  15. Low February 3, 2021 at 12:20 am #

    While I dislike this Sheriff’s press release of the COVID situation, it will be interesting to see if his claim is true. The fact that the deputy director of personnel has a personal connection to two former employees says a lot. I remember seeing news articles regarding that whole mess a while back.

     
  16. Frankly, there's more to this than meets the eye... February 2, 2021 at 9:41 pm #

    I seem to recall some stories in The Sheet about what this is likely about. There are some bad actors at play here and it is not the Sheriff. Maybe it’s time for all of it to come out?

     
  17. David Dennison February 2, 2021 at 8:22 pm #

    Just seems something wrong about an acting Sheriff suing the County and the people he works for. Because if he wins the lawsuit, guess who are the ones that will be paying…

     
    • Low February 3, 2021 at 12:23 am #

      There’s two sides to every story and if his claim is true, the fact that the deputy director of personnel is releasing confidential records to the public is corruption. I don’t like the Sheriff and will gladly be voting against him in 2022, but it’s a bit disturbing that there’s employees with the county that are acting in this manner.

       
    • In theAbstract February 3, 2021 at 9:19 am #

      I take your point but reply with two:

      1) Sometimes it takes a civil lawsuit to hold government officials for their misbehavior; in fact it is often the only way.

      2) The county and its officials are well insured (because they are a distinct liability to the public fisc); so my answer to your “guess who will be paying…” is: the underwriting insurance company.

       
    • In the Abstract February 3, 2021 at 9:42 am #

      I take your point but reply with two:

      1) Sometimes a civil lawsuit is the only way to hold government officials accountable for their misbehavior; it is often the only way.

      2) Being a liability risk, the county and its officials are well insured; so, in answer to your “guess who are the ones that will be paying…”: the underwriting insurance company will be paying.

      (Which, ironically, is one of the reasons government officials think they can misbehave in the first place: if caught and sued, they won’t have to pay any judgment (or defense costs)).

       

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.