Share This Page

Beaver County couple settles lawsuit against three officers

| Wednesday, Jan. 9, 2013, 1:36 p.m.

A Beaver County couple settled their federal civil rights lawsuit against three Midland police officers who arrested them May 8, 2009, according to court documents.

Michael and Melinda Sallie of Midland claimed that officers Bryan Lynk, Bruce Tooch and George Hrubovcak arrested them because Michael Sallie criticized how they were handling the arrest of a drunken man on an adjacent property.

The officers claimed Sallie incited a crowd of more than 20 people attending a party the drunken man came from and defied orders that he be quiet and go inside his house. Melinda Sallie tried to interfere when police arrested Michael Sallie, the officers claimed.

The Sallies originally sued the borough and officer Ronald Lutton, but they dropped their claim against Lutton, and U.S. District Judge David Cercone in March dismissed the borough from the lawsuit.

The joint motion to dismiss the lawsuit filed Tuesday doesn't provide details of the settlement. Patrick Sorek, one of the Sallies' attorneys, couldn't immediately be reached for comment. Charles Saul, one of Midland's attorneys, referred questions to borough Manager Diane Kemp. Kemp said she hasn't seen the settlement.

Brian Bowling is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-325-4301 or bbowling@tribweb.com

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.