Bill for legal fees in restraining order case could land in city's lap

Justice of the Peace Jay Sheffield ruled Tuesday that a Libby city councilmember who obtained a temporary restraining order against the city clerk and then withdrew his petition would not have to pay the clerk’s legal fees because there was not enough evidence that his petition was “frivolous.”

“It doesn’t sit well, it doesn’t make me happy,” Sheffield said, “but the very limited case law that’s out there gives me a pretty narrow road to haul.”

Sheffield said that the case between City Clerk Glena Hook and Councilman D.C. Orr sounded more like a “horrible personnel issue” and that he may not have granted Orr a permanent restraining order had he not quashed it himself. But he also said that Orr’s petition was not “frivolous,” the standard set by legal precedent.

Hook has 10 days from the ruling to appeal the decision, though she probably won’t, her attorney, Todd Glazier, said.

The city is most likely, under the law, responsible for Hook’s legal fees, a bill that Glazier estimates has added up to $5,800, but the council will take a vote on whether to pay it at its next meeting.

Orr said he filed for a restraining order last December because different incidents involving Hook caused him to believe she was mentally unbalanced, and he began to fear her.

Hook said that Orr only began stating that he was afraid of her after she told Libby Mayor Doug Roll and the council in an October personnel meeting that she feared him and wanted him to stop making false accusations about her.

“At one point I feared what Mr. Orr would do next,” she said. “The whole thing that prompted me is that I couldn’t believe that someone would be so mad at me that they would be willing to lie to get me in trouble.”

Orr denied falsely accusing Hook of anything and said that a Missoulian newspaper article that later claimed he accused her of “criminal accounting errors” was inaccurate.

Orr said his safety was threatened by Hook during a telephone conversation last November in which she allegedly threatened to call the police on him for working without a city business license and then allegedly asked him to meet with her.

He said that she had told him, “You know I’m going to get you, one way or another,” though, as Glazier pointed out, Orr left out the alleged statement in his 2-1/2 page affidavit filed in justice court to obtain a restraining order.

Hook said that she received a call that Orr was working in the city without a business license. After attempting to contact the mayor three or four times, she said she called Orr herself and informed him that he didn’t have a business license so that he wouldn’t be “blindsided.”

“I never did ask Mr. Orr to come down and meet me personally,” she said. “I will admit I did tell him it would be easier if he could come down with a cancelled check or purchase a business license so he wouldn’t get a citation.”

Orr said that the alleged statement was the only incident in which he had been threatened in a way that would warrant a restraining order. The remaining alleged incidents outlined in his affidavit provided foundation, he said.

Orr said he dropped his petition for a permanent order of protection last December because he didn’t want Hook’s job to be in jeopardy.

“I was under a lot of influence and pressure from my fellow councilpeople,” he said. “Glena Hook is good at her job and by going through with the petition Glena Hook would quite possibly lose her job.”