The current Grafton County Sheriff’s retaliation lawsuit against her predecessor trudges forward after he responded to her allegations this spring.

Early on, the judge found no probable cause for Grafton County Sheriff Jillian Myers’ additional accusations of discrimination and harassment. Last month, he also decided to remove the County and Sheriff’s Department from the case, leaving only former sheriff Jeffrey Stiegler as a defendant.

As the case stands in Sullivan County Superior Court, Myers has a pending four-count accusation against Stiegler of retaliation; wrongful termination via constructive discharge; violations of the Whistleblower’s Protection Act; and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Back in January, Myers sued Stiegler for his behavior while she was employed as deputy sheriff from 2021 to 2023. She cited discrimination, harassment and retaliation from her superior, which her complaint says ultimately led to her departure.

But according to Myers, the retaliation didn’t stop there.

Jillian Myers (Courtesy photograph)

While Myers claimed Stiegler mistreated her and engaged in unprofessional behavior throughout her time at the department, the remaining counts in the lawsuit come from a personnel incident involving another employee, administrative assistant Karen Bragg.

Myers alleged that Stiegler impeded Bragg’s ability to do her job — particularly maintaining the department schedule — so Bragg brought her concerns to Myers in February of 2023.

Stiegler inquired about their conversation the following day, and spoke negatively of Bragg to Myers in a private conference room, the complaint stated. Stiegler, in his answer to the complaint, denied Myer’s claim that he “degraded” Bragg in this conversation.

Bragg was said to be experiencing emotional distress over this issue, and explained that to Steigler when he inquired about it. Myers claimed that she witnessed him become aggressive and order Bragg into his office, but she refused. As a result, he suspended her.

“Stiegler did not appear in control of his anger and the situation was frightening and escalating,” the complaint stated.

Stiegler argued in the response that Myers could not have fully witnessed the interaction because he called her out to assist the situation. He also denied acting aggressively, or act in any way that would have made Bragg feel unsafe.

Myers worried she would be in trouble for speaking with Bragg and assisting her. According to the complaint, that’s “exactly what happened,” though Stiegler has denied the claim.

When Bragg appealed her suspension to the Grafton County Commissioners, Stiegler asked Myers to provide a written statement, and upon her doing so, said he wondered if he made a mistake promoting her to Sergeant. Myers believed he was unhappy with her honest statement, but Stiegler denied that claim.

The County Commissioners overturned Bragg’s suspension.

In early March, Stiegler cancelled Myers’ upcoming trainings. Two days later, Myers went to Human Resources to discuss the issue with a third party present. Stiegler allegedly entered, “red in the face, shaking and screaming,” per the complaint. As a result, Myers resigned.

She believed his anger was due to her choosing not to provide “the written statement he wanted to support his baseless suspension” of Bragg, which Stiegler denied.

Myers claimed that Stiegler went on to launch an internal investigation about her out of retaliation. On March 22, Stiegler handed her a letter saying she was under investigation for “among other reasons, truthfulness.”

“At no point prior to her resignation was Myers informed that she was under investigation,” the complaint states, though Stiegler denied this point.

Myers claims to have waited months for the results of the investigation, which was supposed to be available in early May. As of June, Myers had law enforcement opportunities on hold due to the investigation, the complaint stated.

A Grafton County Sheriff’s Department directive states the sheriff is expected to provide internal affairs investigation results to the subject within five days of receiving them, according to the complaint, though Stiegler denied having violated that policy.

The initial investigation cleared Myers, but a second one allegedly requested by Stiegler found she violated a policy on “management rights and employee responsibilities.” Myers claimed it was because she considered becoming a witness at Bragg’s suspension hearing without first informing Stiegler and voicing her concerns, though Stiegler denied that as the cause.

Myers has called on the court to award her damages for lost wages, lost employment benefits, emotional distress, humiliation, and inconvenience.

Stiegler asked Judge James Kennedy to dismiss the fourth count relating to emotional distress, claiming that the alleged conduct is not sufficiently “extreme and outrageous.” The judge, however, wrote in a July 29 order that the behavior outlined by Myers, if true, would reach the level of extreme and outrageous.

Kennedy determined that the County did not have authority over Myer’s employment at the time, nor did the Sheriff’s Department as an entity. Further, complications could arise from Myers’ current role as county sheriff if a lawsuit against the department proceeded.

Myers and her attorney, Kathleen Davidson, both declined to comment on the case when reached Friday by phone. Stiegler’s attorney, Keelan Forey, did not respond by deadline to a phone message and email.