By MONROE ROARK
mroark@thecitizennews.com

The Citizen and its publisher have filed a counterclaim seeking damages in the latest round of litigation against the Peachtree City law firm of Webb, Stuckey & Lindsey.

According to documents filed Monday in Fayette County Superior Court, the plaintiffs “have used their position as city attorney to make public statements and contentions to the City Council and elsewhere to the harm and detriment of defendants Calvin N. Beverly and Fayette Publishing” and “have acted under color of law in an effort, joint and severally, to violate and impede rights guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.”

This latest filing comes less than a week after senior Superior Court Judge William F. Grant of Elberton was appointed to hear the case, following the voluntary recusal of Griffin Judicial Circuit judges Johnnie Caldwell, Chris Edwards, Paschal English and Ben Miller.

Webb, Stuckey & Lindsey, city attorneys for Peachtree City since 1992, filed a libel suit last month along with senior partner James Webb against The Citizen, Beverly and Peachtree City resident Stephen Brown concerning two letters Brown wrote that were published in the newspaper.

Brown suggested in his letters that Webb's position on the board of directors of the new Bank of Georgia, with local developers who have been involved in litigation against Peachtree City at various times, could appear as a conflict of interest.

Webb wrote a letter to The Citizen demanding a retraction, and filed suit a week later when no retraction was made.

Attorney Rick Lindsey announced at the March 2 City Council meeting that the suit had been filed, saying that the litigation would be “long and expensive.” That statement was referenced in the counterclaim, filed by Fayetteville attorney Don Johnson and attorney Christopher D. Balch of the Atlanta firm of Swift, Currie, McGhee and Heirs.

“Plaintiffs, acting in concert with others, have instituted this action without justification, for the improper purpose of trying to silence discourse about issues of public concern, and to annoy, harass and to cause unnecessary and needless expense to defendants,” the counterclaim states.

The defendants also are claiming “special damages,” such as legal fees and damage to their business and reputation by what they called “the unprivileged and unlawful conduct of plaintiffs in an amount to be proved at trial.”

In answering the original charges filed by Webb, Beverly and The Citizen maintain that his complaint did not specifically state what language is allegedly false, libelous or defamatory.

As city attorney, Webb “is a public figure,” the counterclaim asserts, and as such he must “prove actual malice in the publication of opinion letters on matters of public concern.”

The counterclaim states that the language in Brown's letters is true, but also constitutes statements of opinion that cannot be proved or disproved.

“Plaintiffs' claim and complaint is interposed for improper purposes, to annoy, harass or silence speakers and public commentators on issues of public concern,” the counterclaim reads. “Therefore, the claim must fail.”