POLICE OFFICER'S LAWSUIT AGAINST CITY REFILED

A lawsuit by a city police officer against his employer and the former
mayor has been refiled in Miramichi's Court of Queen Bench.

During a court hearing in February, Arthur McLean was ordered to
immediately file a new lawsuit that deleted any reference to former
city councillor Martin McIntyre. Justice Barbara Baird issued her
ruling on Feb. 29, but the lawsuit was not filed until May 13.

During that time, McLean's lawyer had been demanding to see the
documents John McKay, the former mayor, had used when preparing a
defence against McLean's lawsuit. The list included notes, letters and
other documents McKay used when consulting with the law firm
representing the city in the civil suit.

In an affidavit, McKay objected to releasing the documents, saying
they were produced for litigation and to obtain legal advice. He
argued they are privileged documents.

Then days after McLean's new statement of claim was filed on May 13,
the city's new law firm on the file, Canty Lutz Delaquis Grant,
demanded particulars from McLean's law firm, Mockler Peters Oley
Rouse, as to how and by whom alleged "rumours" contained in McLean's
statement were "propogated" by the City.

McLean alleges in his statement the defendant, the City of Miramichi,
was the source of the rumours in early September 2004 that said he and
two other police officers were under investigation for dealing drugs.
Days later, he said McKay made the following statement, "The City
Police were going and he was bringing in the RCMP." McLean alleges
this statement added credibility to the circulating rumours and in a
sense suggested he and the rest of the members of the city police
force could not be trusted and were involved in criminal activity.
McLean alleges this was further confirmed by a March 2006 newspaper
report quoting McKay as saying, "Believe it or not, only Christ is
perfect, and now we have a group to join him, and that is the
Miramichi City Police."

The statement of claim says McKay's statements were slanderous and
defamatory and were intended to mean McLean and other city police
officers were dishonest and guilty of criminal activity.

"The Plaintiff was thereby injured of his character, reputation and
good standing, and he suffered ridicule, contempt and damage as a
result thereof."

The statement goes on to say McKay's comment a year later, in March
2007, after being served the original Notice of Action and Statement
of Claim, demonstrated McKay's persistent public attack on McLean's
integrity. The comment in question made reference to McLean's
involvement in the August 2006 death of Max Comeau. The name of the
officer involved in the death had never been made public and McLean
alleges McKay named him in continuance of concerted effort to inflict
economic harm on him.

In the demand for particulars, the city's lawyers want to know when,
where and to whom McKay made the statement; which police file is being
referenced; if there is any prohibition regarding access to the file;
and what economic harm was alleged to have been inflicted.

The City has not yet filed a statement of defence in response to the
new statement of claim.