Duffy Supporters Sue Ex-Sheriff Over Loan

Former Sheriff John Duffy and homicide Lt. John Tenwolde have been sued by three longtime Duffy supporters for failing to repay $43,560 in personal loans and interest used to cover legal costs for both men in a 1986 lawsuit.

William Cowling II, Charles Cono and Barbara Bloom, the wife of the late Arthur Bloom, each filed identical lawsuits earlier this month demanding that Duffy and Tenwolde repay three $12,000 loans, plus 10% interest for each of the past two years.

The $36,000 worth of the original loans now totals $43,560, including interest.

Cowling, Cono and Arthur Bloom, all once members of Duffy’s honorary deputy organization, made the loans in July, 1988, after the American Civil Liberties Union successfully sued Duffy and Tenwolde for improperly using deputies to campaign against California Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird in 1986.

Duffy had on-duty deputies distribute postcards as part of a campaign to remove Bird from the Supreme Court. Bird lost the election and her office. A Superior Court judge ruled in 1986 that Duffy had engaged in illegal political activity.

As a result of the ACLU lawsuit, Tenwolde, who played a major role in handing out the postcards, and Duffy were forced to pay $36,000 in attorney’s fees and court costs. The county refused in 1988 to pay the judgment on behalf of both men.

Duffy and Tenwolde co-signed three promissory notes with Cowling, Cono and Arthur Bloom, due July 20, 1989. The signed notes are attached to the complaints, filed July 5 in Municipal Court.

The loans were extended after Tenwolde filed suit against the county, maintaining that he was acting within the scope of his duties. Duffy has made the same argument.

Tenwolde won a trial on the matter in October, when a jury ruled that he was not personally responsible for the legal fees. Although Duffy was not a party to Tenwolde’s suit, they were held jointly liable in the 1986 lawsuit.

In an interview Thursday, Duffy said he does not expect to have to repay the loan and chided the county counsel for refusing to foot the bill.

“The county is flat wrong on this one,” Duffy said. “This is going to cost them a lot more money than if they just paid the money like they were supposed to in the first place. But nothing the county counsel’s office does surprises me any more.”

The former sheriff said Cowling called him to warn him about the lawsuit.

“He said he was sorry, but it was something he had to do,” Duffy said. “I don’t blame any of them. It was kind enough of them to extend the note.”

The outstanding loans have made Tenwolde nervous and angry, he said Thursday.

“My name still appears on the promissory notes, not the county’s,” he said. “It’s very upsetting that, after working 21 years for the county, and being a good employee, I have been put in an adversarial position with my employer.”

Tenwolde is a homicide lieutenant in charge of the investigation into the shooting death of Deputy Michael Stanewich, who was shot during an armed robbery attempt.

Cowling and Cono did not return telephone calls. Barbara Bloom could not be reached for comment.

Emmanuel Savitch, an attorney for all three parties, said he had no comment beyond the facts stated in the complaint against Duffy and Tenwolde.

“My clients are simply owed money,” he said. “There’s not much more to say than that.”

Morris Hill, the deputy county counsel who is handling the county’s appeal of the Tenwolde decision and has recently been asked to handle the new lawsuits against Tenwolde and Duffy, said he is largely unfamiliar with the new cases.

“Our position has been in the past that county taxpayers should not have to pay for the fact that Duffy and Tenwolde had been held liable,” Hill said. “I have to wait and see if we will keep that position.”

Hill said the county still must decide whether to represent Tenwolde or whether it must represent Duffy.