Forum Post: ROFL: Class war in Aspen?
Posted 12 years ago on March 22, 2012, 12:52 p.m. EST by ups
(0)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
http://www.aspendailynews.com/section/home/152381
SkiCo CEO: Former instructor is a public figure by Chad Abraham, Aspen Daily News Staff Writer Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Printer-friendly version
Email this Story
Kaplan files answer in libel suit from Mulcahy, who is also suing Crowns
The CEO of the Aspen Skiing Co. says a libel lawsuit brought against him by a former ski instructor should be dismissed because the plaintiff is a public figure, according to a court filing.
The attorney for Mike Kaplan filed a response Monday to Lee Mulcahy’s lawsuit in Pitkin County District Court. It says the plaintiff “is a public figure by virtue of his involvement in matters of public interest or general concern.”
Mulcahy on Friday also sued Paula and James Crown, SkiCo’s owners, in Pitkin County Court seeking to overturn his company-imposed ban that prevents him from using ski lifts or otherwise stepping foot on SkiCo properties like restaurants. The lawsuit against the Crowns also seeks $1.
The war of words between Mulcahy and SkiCo began in November 2010, when the instructor filed two complaints with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). He claimed the company had violated federal labor law in restructuring its ski school and by removing him from an elite team of instructors as retaliation for discussing unionization.
Mulcahy has been banned from the ski areas and all company-owned property since Dec. 30, 2010, when he distributed fliers to guests in the SkiCo-owned Little Nell hotel and in gondola plaza. The material criticized the ski school’s pay policies. He was also suspended with pay starting that day and told that the company would press trespassing charges if he violated the ban. He was fired Jan. 31, 2011.
But Kaplan’s answer says, as the CEO wrote in a letter to the editor in February 2011, that Mulcahy was fired for performance reasons unrelated to his NLRB complaints or his union-organizing actions. The NLRB upheld the dismissal.
The CEO acknowledges the claim in Mulcahy’s lawsuit that SkiCo changed certain workplace policies as a result of the settlement between the company and the NLRB.
Mulcahy’s suit, filed Feb. 1, says that numerous “federally mandated changes in the SkiCo’s employee handbook concerning protected freedom of speech and the ski school’s actual structure were required.” One change was “the conclusion of SkiCo’s ‘Team Leader’ program that was established to improve communications between SkiCo ski instructors and management ...,” according to Kaplan’s filing.
Mulcahy, who had been a SkiCo instructor since 1996, claims that Kaplan’s statements to company employees and in letters to the editor about him were false and defamatory.
Kaplan wrote that Mulcahy’s performance infractions included taking a class of young girls out of bounds and using abusive language toward them, and charging a private lesson to a customer’s credit card without authorization.
The lawsuit says Kaplan acted with “reckless or callous indifference” to Mulcahy’s protected rights, and it seeks $15,001 because the plaintiff sustained “a great financial loss” in 2011.
Kaplan, who has enlisted Denver attorneys Edward Ramey and Lila Bateman, denies those allegations. Bateman wrote in the answer that Kaplan’s letters contained both the truth and statements of opinion, and that he “has a qualified privilege to make the alleged statements.”
Neither attorney returned messages asking them to elaborate on the “matters of public interest or general concern” that allegedly make Mulcahy a public figure. The burden of proof in defamation lawsuits is higher for public figures.
Mulcahy also did not return a message seeking comment.
In the lawsuit against the Crowns, Mulcahy says his ban is illegal.
“Plaintiff and others similarly situated will be chilled and burdened in the exercise of his First Amendment rights because of the continued threat of arrest on public property,” wrote Mulcahy, who is representing himself. “The ban is unconstitutionally overbroad [sic] in that it renders subject to incarceration and other treatment persons who are critical of the Crowns or the SkiCo.”
SkiCo spokesman Jeff Hanle declined comment Tuesday.
The SkiCo leases much of the land it uses from the U.S. Forest Service. Because the four ski mountains are under the company’s purview, it contends it can ban Mulcahy from even hiking on national forest land. Mulcahy has since said he received a letter from the Forest Service saying he is allowed to hike and ski down if he chooses. Chairlifts, however, remain verboten.
Mulcahy also sued Heidi Zuckerman Jacobson, director and curator of the Aspen Art Museum, with similar claims in county court. He is banned from museum property after he was allegedly caught on a security camera hanging “for sale” signs at the institution’s new site in downtown Aspen.
Mulcahy denied that accusation but said he taped a “citation from the citizens of Aspen” and a piece of art inspired by Occupy Wall Street “onto the museum’s sign and surveillance camera pole.” Zuckerman Jacobson has yet to file an answer to the lawsuit, which seeks $250.
chad@aspendailynews.com
Attorney for SkiCo, Crowns says lawsuit was served improperly
The lawsuit by a former ski instructor against the Aspen Skiing Co. and its owners should be dismissed because the summons and complaint were not properly served, according to the defendants’ attorney.
Aspen resident Lee Mulcahy’s lawsuit seeking to overturn his ban from SkiCo property should also be dismissed because county courts lack jurisdiction “to grant the relief requested,” the defense motion says.
Mulcahy sued Paula and James Crown, members of the family that owns SkiCo, and the company itself in Pitkin County Court on March 16. He was banned from SkiCo property in December 2010 after he distributed fliers criticizing the company’s pay policies for ski instructors. Mulcahy was fired in January 2011.
His lawsuit, which seeks a dollar in damages, says the ban infringes on his First Amendment rights. The defendants were to respond to the lawsuit by Wednesday, which they did.
Mulcahy was cited March 29 for trespassing after he taped a court summons for the defendants on a door at SkiCo headquarters at the Aspen Business Center.
Mulcahy “attempted to serve the Crowns — but not SkiCo — by simply taping an envelope on the side door of SkiCo’s offices, with a copy of his summons and amended complaint addressed to the Crowns,” says the motion filed by defense attorney Lila Bateman of Denver.
Under the state’s rules for civil court procedures, “such service is clearly insufficient,” Bateman wrote. Serving a summons can only be done “by a person who is not a party to the case,” the motion says. Mulcahy is representing himself.
“Nothing under the rules permits [the] plaintiff to serve individual or company defendants by taping a copy of a summons and complaint to a business’ door in the hopes that someone might find it,” Bateman wrote.
The lawsuit should be dismissed because it was not properly served at least 14 days before Wednesday’s response deadline for the defendants, the motion says.
It should also be dismissed because county courts have no authority over the issuance of an injunction, something Mulcahy is seeking to overturn the property ban.
The Colorado Legislature “has specified that the county court shall have no jurisdiction over ... the issuance of injunctions” except in certain cases involving domestic violence and email spam, the motion says.
— Chad Abraham