Former Elgin City Admin launches three-million-dollar lawsuit against mayor and current admin
By Garrett Christensen on Thursday, April 2nd, 2026 in More Top Stories Northeastern Oregon News
ELGIN – A large and multifaceted lawsuit is currently underway in Union County, centered on the City of Elgin. In brief, the suit, filed by former City Administrator Brock Eckstein and his wife, former Elgin Municipal Judge Laura Eckstein, seeks an estimated three million dollars in damages from the City of Elgin, current Elgin Administrator Alex McHaddad, and Elgin Mayor Stanley James Johnson regarding alleged abuse of process, breach of contract, slander, interference, and emotional distress (among other complaints), stemming from a series of internal and personal disputes circa 2023 through 2025.
Before summarizing specifics of the case, a note of clarification regarding public comment and transparency. Elkhorn Media Group has reached out Brock and Laura Eckstein along with Elgin Mayor Stanley James Johnson and Elgin Administrator Alex McHaddad for official comment on the situation. Managing Attorney Ryan Adams with Fir Law Group (representing Brock and Laura Eckstein) responded to public comment requests and has continued to correspond with Elkhorn Media Group, including providing extensive documentation on several separate occasions.
Both McHaddad and Johnson acknowledged Elkhorn Media Group’s request but respectfully declined to comment in any official capacity. Specifically, EMG received the following response from McHaddad:
“Good afternoon,
On the advice of counsel, we do not comment on litigation.
Best regards,
Alex”
Elkhorn Media Group is, however, currently in the process of attempting to contact the city’s defense council, Román D. Hernández with Cable Huston LLP, for further official comment.
The case itself, number “26CV06926,” was filed with the Union County Circuit Court on February 8, 2026. According to the Oregon Judicial Information System, the next court event is a hearing on April 14, 2026, at 2:00 p.m., for the motion to strike the case, overseen by Judge Jared D. Boyd.
All information hereinafter is summarized from and or quoted verbatim from the documentation provided by Fir Law Group. While an attempt has been made to summarize the key claims and grievances of the plaintiffs, given the extensive nature of the complaints and the sheer volume of information present, it is recommended that readers view the documents for themselves as time allows. This article is meant to serve as a broad summarization of a developing legal case (with the plaintiffs providing the majority of information at this time), rather than a conclusive examination.
All documents will be attached near the bottom of the page.
To clarify the actual scope and intentions of the case, according to court documents provided to Elkhorn Media Group by Adams (initially filed on February 8, 2026), the plaintiffs are listed as “BROCK ECKSTEIN; and, LAURA ECKSTEIN,” while the defendants are listed as (page 1 of PDF):
“CITY OF ELGIN, OREGON, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon; ALEX MCHADDAD, in both his official capacity as Elgin City Administrator and in his personal capacity; STANLEY JAMES JOHNSON, in his official capacity as Mayor of Elgin, Oregon and in his personal capacity,”
The complaints are also listed as follows (page 1 of PDF):
“(Breach of Contract; Unjust Enrichment; Violation of ORS 652, et seq.; Abuse of Process; Libel; Slander; False Light; Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; Intentional Interference with Economic Relations; Negligence; Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress, Declaratory Judgment) Damages estimated at $3,000,000.00”
Finally, to clarify some agreement and employment dates between the parties in question, court documents outline the following:
- Brock Eckstein requested to resign from his admin position in 2021 due to stress, exacerbated in part by Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) resulting from prior overseas military service.
- Following resignation, Brock Eckstein entered into a municipal consulting agreement with the city of Elgin through Laura Eckstein Law, LLC and also agreed to limited civic employment to train his then replacement, Allan Duffy.
- The city retained Brock Eckstein as Pro-Term Administrator in March 2021 following the abrupt retirement of Allan Duffy for unrelated medical reasons.
- Laura Eckstein was hired as Elgin’s Municipal Court Judge in 2017 via personal agreement with the city.
- Laura Eckstein was deployed overseas in the armed forces from approximately June 2024 through a portion of 2025, though continued to act as Elgin’s Municipal Court Judge remotely.
- When Brock Eckstein initially stepped down in 2021, he reached an agreement with the city to receive partial compensation for unpaid vacation and benefits via in-kind transfer of a “laptop, electronics, and tools used for City projects,” due to city budget constraints.
- Plaintiffs purchased the fitness facility in the Elgin Community Center in 2018 and later operated the facility under Olympus Fitness LLC, entering into a service agreement with the Elgin Parks and Recreation District on January 8, 2019.
- In early 2024, Alex McHaddad was in the process of being trained by Brock Eckstein to replace him in the City of Elgin admin position, (following which Eckstein would again work in a private advisory/consulting capacity for the city) though was still formally employed as the City Admin for Sodaville Oregon at the time.
The case, according to documentation, stems from alleged legal, financial and personal retaliation against Brock Eckstein (with subsequent negative impacts against Laura Eckstein) by Mayor Johnson and Admin McHaddad following Brock Eckstein’s refusal to certify Johnson’s court mandated community service hours.
According to the February 8 complaint documents, Mayor Johnson was involved in a fight at the Elgin Station on July 8, 2023, that resulted in the dispatching of Union County Sheriff’s deputies. Though not arrested at the time, documents claim Johnson was eventually charged with assault in the fourth degree and disorderly conduct on July 28, 2023, with him allegedly pleading guilty in November to “offensively touching a female.” This case resulted in a requirement for Johnson to complete 40 hours of community service.
The complaint document, as well as response documents to the defendants motion to strike the case (also provided by Adams) further allege that Johnson approached Brock Eckstein (employed as City Administrator Pro-Term at the time) with a request to assist in fulfilling this community service via community related projects for the city of Elgin, which Eckstein claims to have declined due to ethical concerns. As written by Eckstein in a response document submitted to the Union County Circuit Court on March 27, 2026 (page 32 of PDF):
“As his subordinate and an employee of the City, I expressed serious ethical concerns about the appearance of impropriety. I refused to approve or sign off on any court-related documentation without proper oversight and insisted that any such arrangement be presented transparently to the City Council for formal approval in open session. I also refused to allow Mayor Johnson to “double dip” by receiving community service credit while also receiving a separate benefit in connection with constructing an outbuilding for the Elgin Historical Society.”
Following this, court documents claim that Johnson approached incoming city administrator Alex McHaddad with a similar request, to which McHaddad signed off on the mayor’s community service hours (including an alleged 31.5 hours at the Elgin fire department). The plaintiffs allege that such supervision was fraudulent due to McHaddad still being present in Sodaville at the time the service was stated to have been overseen, and that some of Johnson’s claimed activities (mowing/weed eating in February and clearing snow in January) would have been unrealistic if not impossible given then current weather conditions (I.E. too cold for grass to grow and insufficient snow in the city).
Regardless of the reasoning for refusal, Both Brock and Laura Eckstein as well as Fir Law Group allege that, in retaliation for Brock’s refusal to sign off/claim oversight of the mayor’s community service (in addition to other claims of personal grievances), the City of Elgin would withhold compensation owed to Brock Eckstein and launched a forensic audit against him. This audit, again according to court documents, alleged $31,007.41 in improper spending, including accusations of personal hobby expenses, expenses related to the community center gym, and contracts with the city, among several other items.
As again summarized by the initial complaint document, fourth Cause of Action section (page 12 PDF):
“Defendants initiated legal processes, including a forensic audit, the September 26, 2025
demand letter, and criminal referrals to law enforcement, the Oregon Department of Justice
(DOJ), and other agencies for an ulterior purpose: to avoid paying owed compensation and to
retaliate against Plaintiffs because Plaintiffs refused to engage in Defendants’ corruption and
Defendant Mayor Johnson’s attempted fraud upon the Court.”
The plaintiffs subsequently allege that all flagged expenses (including private judicial/consulting contracts with the city) were legitimate and on record with the City of Elgin and that details surrounding the audit were both misconstrued to authorities and spread via rumor within the Elgin Community, including claims made during a school board meeting that Brock Eckstein was, supposedly, “going to jail.”
According to statements from both sets of documents, as well as an attached copy of the Department of Justice’s findings (see the original complaint document packet), the forensic audit against Brock Eckstein would not result in criminal charges. The DOJ would cite “insufficient evidence of criminal conduct” due to documentation provided by Brock Eckstein’s then attorney Neil Halttunen explaining Eckstein’s conduct and use of finances while employed by the city, thus negating the intention of the investigation. As written in the letter:
“Because the scope of the investigation was limited as to whether Brock Eckstein committed a crime by misappropriating city funds for personal gain, the agency did not separately inquire into whether his conduct isolated any civil regulatory, or employment prohibitions.”
Regarding the extent of allegedly withheld compensation, a letter from Fir Law Group sent to then city attorney Wyatt S. Baum on January 28, 2026, outlines the following (Page 81 of response PDF):
“1. Unpaid Amounts Owed
Under the March 18, 2021, Employment Agreement, the Severance Agreement and Full Release,
and the client fee agreement between Laura Eckstein Law, LLC and the City of Elgin, the
following amounts remain unpaid:
- Grant Bonuses: Brock Eckstein secured over $12,000,000 in grants for the City of Elgin. Pursuant to the Employment Agreement, he is entitled to a bonus of $2,500 per $50,000 in grants secured (capped at $50,000 per calendar fiscal year). Even after application of the cap, the City owes a substantial portion of the earned bonuses, which Brock Eckstein previously waived or applied to City projects in good faith. The City’s repudiation of the agreement revokes any such waiver. Amount due: not less than $250,000.
- Unused Stipends and Benefits: Technology stipend ($15,000 per fiscal year),
- fuel/communication stipends, extra PERS/HSA contributions, and other non-traditional compensation. Amount due: approximately $150,000.
- Severance and Accrued Vacation/Benefits: $19,696.92 acknowledged in the Severance Agreement (partially satisfied in-kind, but remaining balance due). Amount due: balance of approximately $15,000.
- Client Fee Agreement (Laura Eckstein Law, LLC): Unpaid consulting fees ($1,000/month + $125/hour overtime) for services rendered. Amount due: Approximately $10,000.
- Penalty Wages (ORS 652.150): For willful failure to pay final wages upon separation, penalty wages at the rate of 8 hours per day at the regular rate until paid. Estimated penalty: $75,000.
Total amount demanded: not less than $500,000 (exact amount to be proven at trial, including interest and penalties).”
In addition to issues with compensation, documents also claim further financial and emotional distress caused by the actions of the defendants. Claims allege that the audit and the way in which Johnson and McHaddad spread information regarding the situation (such as casual mentions to other community members) caused reputational harm and severe emotional distress to both Brock and Laura Eckstein, further exacerbated by Brock’s PTSD and TBI, and Laura being overseas and away from her family at the time.
Regarding the reputational loss in particular, the documents allege that the audit and the discussion surrounding it caused the City of Joseph to cancel then in-place contracts with Brock and Laura Eckstein. As written in the original complaint document (page 8 of PDF:
“Defendant McHaddad also made defamatory statements to third parties, including in a
closed-door meeting with City of Joseph councilors, leading to the cancellation of Brock
Eckstein’s consulting contract with the City of Joseph, and the cancellation of Laura Eckstein’s
pending municipal judge contract with the City of Joseph.”
Other complaints brought against the defendants include Mayor Johnson’s hostile actions against other city staff, false and defamatory statements made against Brock and Laura Eckstein, and negligence in providing information and documentation to authorities, among other points.
Please keep in mind that, as mentioned, the case is ongoing, with a hearing for the strike motion scheduled for April 15, 2026. Further keep in mind that, while plaintiffs did provide extensive documentation and statements to Elkhorn Media Group and that many details have been provided to the public, no formal conclusions have been reached by the Union County Circuit Court and that both the defendants and their respective legal counsel have either politely declined to give their perspective or have not yet responded to Elkhorn Media Group’s request for comment. More details will be covered as the case progresses.
Current dates and names of active parties in the case can be found at https://webportal.courts.oregon.gov/portal/ by searching the case number, 26CV06926.
Both sets of documents are attached below.
