Shelby County asks for default judgement, immediate removal of County Clerk Wanda Halbert

The Shelby County Attorney's office has filed a motion for default judgement against Shelby County Clerk Wanda Halbert and is seeking to have her removed from office immediately, new filings in the latest attempt to oust Halbert from office show. A private attorney is currently representing the county attorney's office in matters relating to Halbert.

The motion, filed Friday, argues that Halbert did not file an answer to the ouster petition within 20 days of the petition being filed. Halbert did, however, file to dismiss the ouster in an Aug. 26 filing .

The motion for default judgement argued that the motion to dismiss did not qualify as an answer.

"... The Tennessee Court of Appeals held that it was within the sound discretion of the court to grant the default judgement where the defendant's answer was untimely," the motion for default judgement read. "Here, defendant has not filed an answer. Plaintiff is, therefore, entitled to a judgement against the defendant. Wherefore, the plaintiff prays that a judgement of default be entered by the court against the defendant and based on her default this court orders her immediate removal from the office of Shelby County Clerk."

A hearing on the default judgement will be held on Sept. 13, court records show. In the event that Halbert is not removed from office via a default judgement, the hearing will also feature arguments over suspending Halbert from office while the ouster case is pending against her.

"Given that this time period has passed, the defendant has counsel and the seriousness of the allegations against her, this matter should be set as early as practicable per the intent of the legislature and in accordance with the statutes," the motion for an expedited hearing read. "The plaintiff would also request that the vacancy of the office of the Shelby County Clerk be filled."

Halbert filing a motion to dismiss, but not an answer to the complaint, follows the same trend as her previous ouster case. She filed a similar motion when she was first being ousted , which was denied as premature. Later, she filed another motion to dismiss which was granted.

In the new motion to dismiss, Halbert has alleged that Robert Meyers, the attorney representing the Shelby County Attorney's Office due to a perceived conflict of interest, does not have standing to act on behalf of the county attorney's office.

The motion to dismiss also cites a case against former President Donald Trump in Florida that alleged Trump had taken sensitive documents prior to leaving the White House, that was dismissed due to the U.S. Senate not appointing a special counsel prosecutor.

Also filed Friday was the county attorney's office's response to the motion to dismiss the current ouster petition. The chief argument made in the response is that the motion to dismiss was premature — a similar argument made during the last ouster petition.

County news: County OKs inmate mental health architectural contract, MATA makes cuts | The Week in Politics

More: Teen accused of killing 'Watermelon Man' has $1.2 million bail set | On the Docket

In addition to arguing the proper time to file an ouster petition, the county's response argues that "the statute speaks in the plural, 'county attorneys' and is not permissive, but rather mandatory" when arguing whether the county attorney's office can bring the petition.

In line with that argument, the response says that Meyers is "simply representing" the county attorney in the ouster petition, adding that Meyers not having standing due to not being properly retained "borders on being specious."

"Contrary to defendant's claims, Meyers is permitted to represent the county attorney under Shelby County's Code of Ordinance, Section 2-252," the response read. "Defendant correctly quotes this section of the county's code of ordinances but grossly misinterprets it. Defendant relies on the definition of 'extraordinary litigation' to require county commission approval to hire Meyers. Unfortunately for defendant, the ouster petition before this court is not 'extraordinary litigation.'"

The response argues that extraordinary litigation excludes litigation that is started or pursued by the county, in its normal duties, that is meant to enforce state law or prosecute any claims. The state law being enforced here, according to the response, is the state's ouster law.

"Defendant has been derelict in her duties as Shelby County Clerk, which is laid out in painstaking detail in the petition," the response reads. "Defendant fails to deny any one of these allegations. Instead, defendant argues that Shelby County Attorney [Marlinee] Iverson has lost standing to file the petition because she retained outside counsel to represent the county attorney in bringing this ouster (due to a potential conflict of interest, which defendant can waive). Unfortunately for defendant, the ouster statute says no such thing. The ouster statute unequivocally grants standing to Shelby County Attorney Iverson to bring this lawsuit, which she has done. Defendant's attempt to shift the focus on who represents the county attorney is improper and is done to distract and delay the expedited hearing in this case."

This is the second ouster petition against Halbert. The first was brought by Hamilton County District Attorney Coty Wamp. That case was ultimately dismissed because the judge overseeing the ouster ruled that Wamp did not have standing to bring the ouster.

This article originally appeared on Memphis Commercial Appeal: Shelby County asks for default judgement, immediate removal of County Clerk Wanda Halbert