MANSFIELD - The attorney for a former municipal employee who won a lawsuit against the town is seeking to reinstate a half-million dollar award against the Mansfield electric department, and is also arguing that Town Manager John D'Agostino is personally liable in the case, disputing an argument made by the town's lawyer.

At the center of both disputes is $500,000 in punitive damages awarded by a federal jury to the former employee, Kimberly Stoyle, in an Aug. 2 verdict that found both D'Agostino and the town liable for discrimination and retaliation against Stoyle, the electric department's former chief financial officer.

The jury also awarded Stoyle $300,000 in compensatory damages and more in fees and interest.

U.S. District Court Judge Douglas P. Woodlock threw out the jury's $500,000 punitive award against the electric department on Sept. 26, saying it was impermissible under the Massachusetts Whistleblower's Act, one of four statutes under which the department was found liable in the lawsuit.

But in a motion filed late last week, Stoyle's attorney, Lynn Leonard, asked Woodlock to restore the $500,000 in punitive damages awarded to Stoyle from the electric department. She argued that the electric department is still liable for the $500,000 award under one of the other four statutes, the state law governing discrimination claims. The wording of that law, Chapter 151B, states that it "shall be construed liberally," and that "any (other) law inconsistent with (it) shall not apply." Therefore, Leonard argued, it should supercede the provision of the Whistleblower's Act that would limit the electric department's liability. She argued that ruling otherwise would be "inconsistent with Chapter 151B's mandate."

In a separate matter also pertaining to the punitive award, Leonard Kesten, the lawyer representing D'Agostino and the town in the case, has filed a motion arguing that the judge cannot hold D'Agostino personally liable for $500,000 in punitive damages because the text of the August jury verdict specifically awarded the punitive damages against the electric department.

But in another motion filed at the end of last week, Leonard dismissed Kesten's argument, arguing that federal rules give Woodlock wide latitude in administering the jury's verdict and thus allow him to award damages against D'Agostino personally, regardless of the jury verdict slip's precise wording.

Woodlock "had the opportunity to evaluate D'Agostino's conduct," Leonard wrote, "and the discretion to award $500,000 in punitive damages based upon the callous nature of the conduct and the harm to the plaintiff (Stoyle)."

Furthermore, Leonard argued that Woodlock made clear to the jurors that the two defendants, the electric department and D'Agostino, were effectively one in the same.

As evidence, Leonard pointed out that before Woodlock sent jurors to deliberate on Aug. 1, the judge told them: "Mr. D'Agostino is the person who ran the municipal electric department and his acts, his own personal acts, are also the acts of the municipal electric department."

Thus, Leonard wrote, "The punitive damage award reflects the jury's and the (judge's) assessment of D'Agostino's 'personal acts.' The (judge) properly exercised its discretion ... presumably in the interests of justice, to harmonize the jury verdict slip and the jury instructions."

Earlier in the week, Leonard had asked the judge to forbid D'Agostino from disposing of his assets. She calculated that D'Agostino could owe Stoyle up to $1.24 million. In her motion on Friday, Leonard argued that D'Agostino cannot argue that the amount is too high because he never presented the jury with evidence of his financial situation.

Leonard has requested that the judge schedule a hearing to deal with the case's ongoing disputes. That could take place as early as later this month.

Kesten has also left open the possibility that Mansfield will appeal Woodlock's decision to a higher court, in this case the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, extending the lawsuit further. That would be a different tack from the one taken with Stoyle's co-plaintiff, Jack Beliveau, the electric department's former director.

The same jury that found in Stoyle's favor also awarded Beliveau $655,000 in damages, finding he was fired for supporting Stoyle's discrimination claims. In August, selectmen paid Beliveau $1.6 million - nearly two-thirds of it for attorney's fees - to settle his side of the case. The money came from the electric department's reserve fund, which stood at $3.3 million before Beliveau was paid.

Although D'Agostino's contract with the town indemnifies him from paying damages in work-related legal disputes, the town counsel, Robert Mangiaratti, said in an interview that he was not yet certain whether D'Agostino or the town would have to pay Stoyle for damages found against the town manager personally.

"It's complicated," Mangiaratti said. "It's a complicated issue, and it's one that I'm reluctant to make any snap judgments on."

He added that the issue cannot be fully examined until legal proceedings in the case are completed.

TED NESI covers Mansfield for The Sun Chronicle. He can be reached at tnesi@thesunchronicle.com or 508-236-0434.