Justly Prudent seeks justice for whistleblower fired by Montgomery County after reporting fraud

Owen Sullivan spent decades building a career in public service. When he discovered what he believed to be misuse of state grant funds and potentially fraudulent overtime billing at the Montgomery County Police Department, he did what the law expects of a government employee: he reported it. Twenty-four days later, Montgomery County fired him.

On January 15, 2026, Justly Prudent filed a lawsuit in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, Maryland, on behalf of Mr. Sullivan against Montgomery County, his former manager, and his former supervisor. The complaint charges the defendants with wrongful discharge in violation of public policy, First Amendment retaliation, and violations of Mr. Sullivan's due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Mr. Sullivan joined Montgomery County Government in late December 2024 as a Labor Relations Specialist III. He was assigned to support the Montgomery County Police Department and the Sheriff's Office, handling disciplinary processes, grievance proceedings, and collective bargaining activities. Before he raised any concerns, his manager publicly praised him in a staff meeting for clearing a backlog of work, and his own performance evaluation would later describe him as "highly productive" and "super responsive."

The trouble began in June and July 2025, when Mr. Sullivan reported to his supervisors that the County appeared to be engaged in unlawful bargaining practices with police unions in violation of the Montgomery County Code. A senior County attorney had characterized certain side agreements between the County and police unions as "unlawful," and a colleague confirmed the County had violated the law dozens of times over a five-year period, with agreements signed off by the Police Chief, Mr. Sullivan's manager, and the Office of the County Attorney.

On July 8, 2025, Mr. Sullivan escalated his concerns in a confidential memorandum to his manager. The memo detailed two alarming discoveries. First, a police department budget manager had directed staff to process a $396,000 invoice using state grant funds for services that had not yet been performed and would not be completed within the grant period—a practice the County's own Inspector General had previously investigated and confirmed as improper. Second, a certified public accountant within the police department had documented concerns about potentially fraudulent overtime billing to Montgomery County Public Schools, including charges for a football game in March—a month when no football games were played—and officers claiming more than six hours for a single game.

Less than a month later, on August 6, 2025, Mr. Sullivan's supervisor issued him a performance evaluation rating him "Below Expectations." The evaluation contradicted itself on its face. It simultaneously acknowledged that Mr. Sullivan was "highly productive," rated him "Highly Successful" for productivity, and noted that both the Police Department and Sheriff's Office found him "super responsive" and "very responsive." The evaluation criticized Mr. Sullivan for being too passive at a meeting, despite the fact that the supervisor had previously instructed him to "be quieter and just listen." When Mr. Sullivan asked his supervisor to provide a single example supporting the claim that he "blamed others," the supervisor could not provide one.

On August 12, 2025, Mr. Sullivan sent a detailed written response directly to the Montgomery County Inspector General, requesting an investigation into the financial misconduct he had uncovered and the retaliatory evaluation he had received. He copied his supervisors, the County Attorney's office, and Human Resources. The Inspector General responded on August 22, confirming that the office was actively reviewing the police department invoicing matter Mr. Sullivan had reported.

On September 5, 2025, exactly 24 days after his report to the Inspector General, Mr. Sullivan's manager fired him. The termination notice cited only his "probationary" status and offered no substantive explanation for why an employee the County's own records described as highly productive was suddenly out of a job.

Mr. Sullivan is seeking, among other things, expungement of the false statements from his personnel file and an order preventing the County from sharing those false statements with future employers.

The case is Owen Sullivan v. Montgomery County, MD, et al., filed in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, Maryland. (Case No. C-15-CV-26-000278).