Judge overturns Cold Spring verdict

A Stearns County judge has overturned a jury verdict that awarded Cold Spring-Richmond police chief candidate Eric Johnson $76,966 after Cold Spring offered him the job, then rescinded the offer.

Judge John Scherer ruled that, while there was evidence to support the jury's finding, the legal analysis of the promissory estoppel claim at issue supports the city rather than Johnson. His ruling means Johnson won't get the money the jury awarded him after a trial in August.

Johnson's attorney, Betsey Lund, said Friday evening that Johnson was considering, but hadn't decided, whether to appeal Scherer's ruling.

The city rescinded its job offer to Johnson when city officials discovered discrepancies about certifications he listed on his resume. Johnson quit his job in Minneota after then-Cold Spring City Administrator Paul Hetland assured him that the Cold Spring-Richmond job was his.

The jury found that Johnson relied on Hetland's promise to quit his job and that his reliance on Cold Spring's offer was to his detriment when the city didn't hire him. The jury found for the city on the other disputed count at the trial.

Attorneys for the city argued after the trial that Scherer shouldn't enforce the jury's verdict on the promissory estoppel claim because Johnson should have known that Hetland's promise didn't mean that he was hired. The City Council still had to vote to approve his hiring, the city argued in its court brief. The city also argued that the job offer was at-will and not for long-term employment and that Johnson wasn't harmed by quitting the Minneota job because he makes more now than he did as Minneota police chief.

Scherer ruled that, although Johnson reasonably relied on Hetland's promise of employment initially, the reliance on that promise became unreasonable. That's because the proposed contract stated that Johnson wasn't hired until the City Council voted to approve his contract and because Johnson testified that he knew in general that he wasn't officially hired until the council approved his contract, Scherer wrote.

"Not only did Hetland lack the authority but it is presumed that (Johnson) knew that he lacked the authority," Scherer wrote. "(Johnson) should not have relied on Hetland."

Johnson didn't need to resign so quickly from his job in Minneota, Scherer wrote, and he didn't take any action to withdraw his resignation once he learned he might not be hired in Cold Spring.

"It is hard to argue that the court should step in and enforce the promise to prevent an injustice when (Johnson) himself could have sought to prevent it," Scherer wrote. "It begs the question of whether there even is an injustice."

A claim for promissory estoppel, Scherer wrote, must prove three elements: that a clear and definite promise was made, that the person making the promise intended the other party to rely on the promise and that the promise needed to be fulfilled to prevent an injustice.

The jury found that the first two elements were met, Scherer wrote. The third question is for the court, not the jury, to decide, he wrote.

And the standard in deciding that question is not whether the promise should be enforced to do justice, but whether enforcement is required to prevent an injustice, Scherer wrote.

Scherer also cited Johnson's at-will employment status as a key factor in his analysis. That status meant that Johnson could be terminated from employment at any time without cause.

Case law weighs against enforcing a claim of promissory estoppel against a government agency, Scherer wrote. The city had a compelling reason to rethink its decision to hire Johnson because of the discrepancies on his resume, Scherer wrote. And the city gained nothing from breaking its promise, he wrote.

Johnson testified at trial that he and Hetland negotiated the parameters of a contract two weeks before questions arose about shortcomings in Johnson's law enforcement-related certifications. The inaccuracies on Johnson's resume and job application unraveled any plans the city might have had to hire Johnson.

Johnson submitted a resume that inaccurately stated that he was certified as a first responder and in CPR. That meant that Johnson didn't meet the minimum qualifications for the job. Johnson told jurors that he didn't try to mislead anyone. He said he interpreted the application to ask whether he had ever had those certifications, not whether they were current. He said that he registered for the appropriate training classes to get current with those certifications as soon as he realized that had become a problem.

Follow David Unze on Twitter @sctimesunze or call him at 255-8740.