A federal lawsuit claims that elected officials and municipal leaders carried out a coordinated campaign of retaliation and defamation against a private citizen who engaged in civic advocacy. The complaint was filed by Eric Moore in the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan on March 25, 2026, naming as defendants Josh Paladino (in both his individual and official capacities as City Council Member and Mayor Pro-Tem), Rob Socha (in both his individual and official capacities as City Council Member), the City of Hillsdale, and ten unnamed individuals believed to be affiliated with Hillsdale College.
According to the filing, Moore alleges that between July 2025 and February 2026 he was subjected to acts intended to intimidate him after exercising his First Amendment rights. These acts allegedly included an anonymous package sent to his home, defamatory statements made at an official city council meeting, social media amplification of false narratives about him, uninvited visits to his business by city officials, unsolicited recorded phone calls admitting retaliatory motives, and further contacts aimed at discouraging legal action.
The complaint outlines Moore’s background as a resident of Hillsdale who served as Chair of the City Planning Commission and was later nominated for appointment to the Library Board. His civic engagement included advocating for road safety improvements in June 2025—a proposal opposed by Paladino but initially supported then voted against by Socha—and raising concerns about a planning commission nominee’s fitness due to past property neglect costing taxpayers approximately $200,000. Moore contends these actions were protected speech under the First Amendment.
In July 2025, Moore’s wife received an anonymous package containing an energy drink at their home address. The purchase was made using methods designed to obscure the sender’s identity. An investigation revealed links suggesting possible connections with individuals affiliated with Hillsdale College’s Washington D.C. satellite campus. Local law enforcement opened but later closed a criminal investigation into the incident after characterizing it as possible retail fraud—an explanation Moore disputes based on circumstances described in the complaint.
On October 5, 2025, Moore emailed select city council members expressing concerns about nominee Jeff Fazekas’ suitability for appointment due to prior dereliction in property maintenance. Paladino subsequently withdrew Fazekas’ nomination but allegedly developed animus toward Moore as a result.
At a January 20, 2026 council meeting where Moore was nominated for the Library Board, Paladino publicly stated that Moore had previously advocated against regulating children’s library content regarding sexuality or violence—a characterization which Moore asserts is false and damaging. According to the complaint: “Plaintiff’s 2023 email addressed risk management issues and concerns about book banning policy. It did not advocate for children’s access to sexual, violent, or vulgar content in any form as Paladino falsely stated.”
Following this statement at the council meeting—which was recorded in official minutes—Moore demanded an apology and retraction via email on January 21. Within hours of this demand: Socha visited Moore’s business unannounced; Paladino called Moore on his personal cell phone (the first such contact between them), admitted being upset about the retraction request during a call that was recorded without prior consent; yet no apology or retraction was offered.
The complaint further alleges that after these events Moore’s demand email was shared on social media platforms operated by individuals connected with Hillsdale College PhD students affiliated with Paladino. Comments online characterized Moore as supporting pornography for children—a claim described in court documents as “entirely false” and “highly defamatory.”
In February 2026 Socha attempted further contact by leaving an unofficial voicemail inviting discussion; again this contact is presented as part of ongoing efforts perceived by Moore as intimidation related to his legal claims.
Moore also claims that when he requested through counsel that Paladino retract his statements publicly—citing constitutional violations—the City Council voted six-to-two against issuing such a retraction or apology. The suit argues this vote constitutes official ratification by the municipality of unconstitutional conduct under Monell liability standards.
Beyond specific incidents involving himself personally, Moore alleges there is broader context indicating a pattern within city government: citing multiple department head resignations attributed partly to what is described as negative drama or hostile environment created by council conduct.
The lawsuit brings twelve counts including First Amendment retaliation (free speech clause), petition clause violations relating to demands for redress; Monell municipal liability; civil conspiracy under color of law; defamation; false light invasion of privacy; intentional infliction of emotional distress; intrusion upon seclusion; harassment; tortious interference with business relations; civil conspiracy under Michigan law; and spoliation of evidence regarding alleged destruction or non-preservation of key recordings.
Moore seeks compensatory damages totaling $500,000 for injuries including reputational harm and economic loss; punitive damages up to $500,000 against named individuals for willful disregard of rights; exemplary damages under state law for malicious publication; injunctive relief requiring formal public retraction at a council meeting clarifying contents of previous communications; declaratory relief establishing constitutional violations occurred; attorney’s fees pursuant to statute if successful; interest allowed by law; along with any other relief deemed appropriate by the court.
The case is identified as Case No. 1:26-cv-00995 ECF No.1 in the United States District Court for Western District of Michigan Southern Division. Jeffrey C. Hart from Smith Haughey Rice & Roegge represents Eric Moore.
Source: 126cv00995_Eric_Moore_v_Josh_Paladino_Complaint_Western_District_of_Michigan.pdf
