Complaints ordered kept away from car museum

The three men formerly were connected to the Packard museum.

By Ed Runyan

WARREN — A judge has granted a temporary restraining order that requires three men to keep their complaints away from Packard Park and the National Packard Museum’s annual car show there this week.

Judge John M. Stuard of Trumbull County Common Pleas Court granted the order Friday, the same day the board of the museum, 1899 Mahoning Ave., filed a complaint asking that the men be prevented from “defaming Packard Museum and Packard’s board members.”

According to the complaint, Robert S. Powell of Jacksonville, Fla., and Robert Sturdevant and James D. McFarland, both of Warren, have participated in numerous attempts since 2006 to “send, distribute and convey threatening and harassing letters, e-mails, fliers and pamphlets to Packard’s guests, members and directors.”

All three men are formerly connected with the museum and all have filed lawsuits against the museum since 2007.

The museum’s legal action lists 11 times the men supposedly defamed the museum, including one time when Powell and Sturdevant purportedly distributed fliers to Packard guests during the 2006 car show that criticized Mary Anne Porinchak, executive director and president of the museum.

Either Powell or Sturdevant were involved in most of the activities, the legal action says, and it accuses McFarland, a funeral home director, of participating in one of them — distributing a 12-page packet in fall 2007 to Trumbull 100, a local business and philanthropic organization, that “disparages Packard’s promoting efforts of an art project called ‘Spectacle of Speed,’” the lawsuit said.

McFarland said he had nothing to do with the packet and has purposely stayed away from the car show the past six years.

Powell said he had come to the area with the purpose of attending the car show this week but won’t be doing so now.

Powell admits he has been critical of Porinchak the past four years but says his statements about her have been true and wonders if keeping him out of a public park this week violates his First Amendment rights.

Of the activities listed as involving Sturdevant, he was asked specifically whether he participated in distributing a flier July 21, 2007, on museum grounds during the 2007 show that criticized Porinchak.

Sturdevant denied any involvement.

“We talk among ourselves, and we want to make the problems better. I think you’re allowed to have an opinion,” Sturdevant said.

Dan Keating, who represents the three men in two previous legal actions filed against the museum, said McFarland’s 2007 lawsuit seeking the return of items McFarland said are missing, was withdrawn recently and will be refiled as a combination lawsuit involving McFarland, Sturdevant and Powell.

Keating said he wonders how the temporary restraining order could have been approved with so little supporting information attached, such as an explanation of why “immediate and irreparable harm” would have been done to the museum without the order or why it was necessary to rule on the request without hearing from Keating before the decision was made.

Another hearing on the request is set for 10:15 a.m. July 31. McFarland said he believes Keating will file an answer today to Judge Stuard’s ruling from Friday.

runyan@vindy.com