PANOLA COUNTY, Texas — A former Panola County deputy filed a lawsuit on Monday, accusing the county sheriff of retaliation after his election bid to unseat the sheriff, failed.
According to the lawsuit, Jeffrey Dale Martin claims Sheriff Ronald "Cutter" Clinton threatened sheriff’s office employees who were perceived as supportive of Martin’s campaign and stopped them from placing signs in support of the campaign at their private residences.
Martin claims in the lawsuit that Clinton told the commissioners court that Martin would be fired after the 2024 primary election, and Martin’s jailer’s commission from the Texas Commission On Law Enforcement would be revoked. Martin also claims that a Panola County Sheriff’s Office employee was threatened with “consequences” due to her husband's support of Martin.
After being advised to stop the retaliation in a meeting with the Panola County Judge Rodger McLane and county attorneys, the lawsuit claims that Clinton said, “I am the sheriff! I can do what I want!”
The lawsuit claims Clinton began retaliating against those who supported Martin’s campaign after Martin lost the election, including removing a reserve deputy and the sheriff’s office chaplain.
Martin also claims Clinton refused to sign the memorandum of understanding with TCOLE, which ended Martin's ability to do his job. According to the lawsuit, Martin was then placed on paid leave as county commissioners "try and figure it out."
The lawsuit was filed in federal court on Monday in the Eastern District of Texas Court out of Marshall.
Martin is asking the court to issue an order stopping "Clinton and his subordinates from retaliating and continuing to retaliate against him for their exercise of his First Amendment Rights." He would also like to have a jury trial to determine the outcome of the case.
Martin is seeking to recover damages including past economic of lost wages, future economic losses in the form of future lost earnings and loss of earning capacity, damages for past and future emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, and punitive or exemplary damages, according to the lawsuit.