Case CLOSED

By now you have seen the headline regarding the forever ongoing lawsuit against the Town of Smithfield & Dvid Marshburn by Ronald Johnson- has ended. The 37-page document was an interesting read for a bedtime story.

Federal Judge Ends Johnson Lawsuit Against Smithfield:

After years of headlines, accusations, Facebook commentary, legal filings, and enough courtroom drama to keep a small forest supplied with paperwork, the federal lawsuit filed by former Smithfield police detective and school board member Ronald Johnson is over. The fat lady sang, the curtain dropped, and the federal court closed the file.

The final result?

The court granted summary judgment to both the Town of Smithfield and David Marshburn, meaning every remaining claim went down before ever reaching a jury.

This was not a split decision, not a partial victory. This was not a "we'll let a jury sort it out." This was a complete win for the remaining defendants.

What The Judge Actually Said:

Let's translate legalese into plain Johnston County English.

A summary judgment ruling means the judge looked at the evidence and determined there was not enough for a reasonable jury to rule in Johnson's favor on the surviving claims. Instead of moving forward to trial, the case ended right there.

In other words:

The courtroom version of "show your work" did not go well.

The Court Basically Said: You Can't Just Say It. You Have to Prove It.

One of the most important parts of the decision wasn't buried deep in the order.

It was right near the beginning. The judge noted serious deficiencies in Johnson's responses to the Town's Statement of Material Facts. The court found that many factual claims were either challenged without proper evidence or not properly disputed under court rules.

The result? Many of the Town's facts were deemed admitted. That is a brutal place to start a lawsuit you're trying to win.

The federal court essentially said:

"Disagreeing isn't evidence."

Facebook comments aren't evidence. Rumors aren't evidence. Feelings aren't evidence. Courtrooms want receipts.

The Retaliation Claims Hit a Brick Wall:

A major part of Johnson's case was the allegation that Smithfield retaliated against him after he complained that the investigation was motivated by discrimination.

The judge wasn't buying it.

Why? Because the investigation started before the protected complaint did. The court repeatedly pointed out that the investigation had already begun before Johnson's July 27, 2022, discrimination letter.

That created a very obvious problem:

It's difficult to argue somebody launched an investigation in retaliation for a complaint that hadn't happened yet. Physics is tough. Timelines are tougher.

Federal judges apparently notice both.

The court further held that Smithfield presented legitimate reasons for termination, including concerns about public trust, credibility, honesty, school board censures, and conduct involving a female employee. The judge ultimately concluded no reasonable jury could find those reasons were merely a pretext for retaliation.

The FMLA Claim Got the Same Treatment:

Johnson also claimed the Town interfered with his medical leave by requiring contact during the investigation. The court described those communications as brief and limited. Not harassment, coercion, not unlawful interference. Just minimal contact tied to an ongoing investigation.

The legal term used by the court was "de minimis."

The plain English translation? The judge basically said, "This isn't enough to make a federal case out of."

Then Came the Defamation Claim:

This is where things really got spicy. Johnson argued that statements made by David Marshburn during Facebook Live broadcasts were defamatory. The judge agreed that if certain statements were false, they could certainly damage someone's reputation. But then the court examined later evidence. Including Johnson's own admissions. Including criminal trial testimony. Including criminal convictions. And that's where the wheels came off.

The Truth Defense Arrived Like a Wrecking Ball:

One sentence from the decision should make every public figure stop and pay attention:

Truth or substantial truth is a complete defense to defamation.

The judge found that the "sting" of many of Marshburn's statements was substantially true. The ruling points to evidence that Johnson admitted making secret recordings, admitted recording a closed school board session, retained recordings on personal storage, and was later convicted on multiple criminal counts.

This wasn't the judge saying every word ever spoken was perfectly accurate.

The judge's point was much simpler: "If the core accusation is substantially true, a defamation claim has a very steep hill to climb." And in this case, that hill was more like Mount Everest wearing roller skates.

The "Actual Malice" Problem:

Even if the truth defense hadn't been enough, the defamation claim faced another obstacle. Johnson acknowledged he was a public figure. That meant he had to prove actual malice. Not disagreement, not bias, not frustration. Not "that guy doesn't like me."

Actual malice. As in knowingly false statements or reckless disregard for the truth.

The judge found no evidence supporting that standard and concluded no reasonable jury could find actual malice by clear and convincing evidence.

That's not merely a loss. That's the legal equivalent of being told your ladder wasn't even tall enough to reach the first rung.

Perhaps the most remarkable thing about the ruling is the contrast between how this saga was publicly framed and how it ultimately ended.

For years, residents were told this case would expose retaliation. Expose corruption, expose political targeting, expose wrongdoing by others.

Instead, the final federal ruling repeatedly relied on evidence connected to Johnson's own conduct, including admissions and criminal convictions, when analyzing why his remaining claims failed. That's not opinion. That's what the order says.

Bottom Line! The federal court has spoken! The Town won! Marshburn won!

The case is closed!!! bye bye bye......

After dozens of filings, years of litigation, and mountains of allegations, the final chapter came down to a lesson as old as the legal system itself: If you're bringing claims into federal court, eventually the spotlight lands on the evidence.

Not the rumors, not the social media posts, not the outrage. Just the EVIDENCE!

According to Judge James Dever, the evidence simply wasn't enough to keep Johnson's remaining claims alive.

🔥 JoCo Citizens Takeaway: For years the public was promised a bombshell. What arrived instead was a 37-page federal order explaining, in painstaking detail, why the remaining claims failed. Sometimes the biggest plot twist is discovering the receipts don't match the story. And in this case, the judge went receipt by receipt.

That is all!

Carry on!

©2026 The JOCO Sass Dispatch