Tim Burgess sues Ottawa High, this time for conspiracy

Tim Burgess is taking Ottawa High School back to court, this time alleging he was the victim of a conspiracy by high school officials.

Burgess recently filed a four-count civil complaint in La Salle County Circuit Court alleging civil conspiracy and both intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress by then-superintendent Matt Winchester and members of the education board. He also alleges defamation against board member Karen Fisher.

The case is assigned to La Salle County Circuit Judge Eugene P. Daugherity, but dates are pending.

Don Harris, president of the Ottawa High School board, said the board has not been served with a copy of the lawsuit and thus cannot comment on pending litigation, though he did issue a limited statement on behalf of the board.

“Based on my understanding, Mr. Burgess has, unfortunately, filed another lawsuit that essentially rehashes allegations ... previously made in multiple lawsuits that have been found to lack merit by both state and federal courts,” Harris said.

Winchester no longer is with the Ottawa High school district and issued a separate statement when reached for comment.

“As previous superintendent of Ottawa Township High School, I had a duty to investigate formal complaints from staff as stipulated in Board of Education policy,” Winchester said. “Actions taken by me as superintendent were always under the advice and direction of the school district’s attorneys. Under the supposed ‘Factual Background’ section of the lawsuit document, I noted more than 20 false statements. The outcome of this lawsuit should be based on fact. Tim Burgess’ documented inappropriate and unprofessional actions throughout his career speaks volumes as to the legitimacy of this lawsuit.”

As previously reported, Burgess was fired as an Ottawa High teacher in 2015 for what a majority of board members termed “inappropriate and unprofessional conduct,” based on his conduct at a September 2014 union meeting, a November 2014 union meeting and a December 2014 investigatory meeting. He was reinstated earlier this year following multiple court actions.

Now, however, Burgess alleges that Winchester and the board made a concerted effort to push him out over a series of personal grievances, including Burgess’ stated support of the former building trades program and his support for a new teachers’ contract.

“In sum, Burgess was terminated for conduct occuring with no students present, after school hours, in a union meeting where he was speaking out against Winchester, based on an investigation by Winchester and testimony by persons with a known animus against Burgess and in direct opposition to the findings of an independent hearing officer,” Northbrook attorney Jeffrey Rosenberg wrote in Burgess’ complaint.

Reached after hours, Rosenberg said the facts Winchester disputes in the complaint were drawn in large part from an appellate court ruling in which the justices found the actions taken to be “wrong, improper and unsupported by the facts” and that Burgess’ termination was “unjustified.”

In response to Harris’ statement, Rosenberg said, “This lawsuit alleges brand new causes of actions based in part on the findings of the appellate court, which found the actions of Mr. Winchester, the board and other teachers were wholly improper, as well as reflecting the extensive damages suffered by Mr. Burgess as a result of three years of litigation.”