East St. Louis punished for obstructing discovery in housing authority lawsuit
A federal judge sanctioned the city of East St. Louis and City Manager Robert Betts after finding they obstructed discovery in a lawsuit filed by former officials who allege they were forced out for blowing the whistle on the East St. Louis Housing Authority.
Shonte Mueller, a former housing authority board member, and her husband Nicholas Mueller, a former East St. Louis assistant police chief, filed the lawsuit in 2024 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.
They accuse city leaders of forcing Nicholas Mueller to retire by threatening termination and conspiring to remove Shonte Mueller from the board in retaliation.
The Muellers allege it was retaliation because Shonte Mueller raised concerns that the interim director of the housing authority was not following federal regulations and procedures, which she felt would jeopardize its certification through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
East St. Louis leaders, including the mayor, city manager and city council members named in the complaint, denied the allegations in their responses to the litigation in court.
But Judge David W. Dugan has entered a default judgment against the city of East St. Louis and City Manager Robert Betts on all claims against them, in addition to at least $10,871 in monetary sanctions, because of their “flagrant bad faith” in the discovery process.
The price includes $7,771 in plaintiffs’ attorney fees and $3,100 in unpaid daily penalties of $100 per business day, which will continue to accrue until they pay the sanctions and fully comply with every remaining discovery obligation.
Dugan also ordered East St. Louis to hire a third-party vendor to perform forensic imaging services of city officials’ devices and email systems to collect the communication records that have been withheld from the plaintiffs.
“Defendants have now demonstrated, through repeated and willful disregard of explicit court orders, deadlines, accumulating daily fines, and the threat of forensic imaging, that no sanction short of default judgment will vindicate the court’s authority or restore the integrity of the discovery process,” Dugan’s order stated.
Betts and attorneys representing the city and the Muellers did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the default judgment on Thursday. The case remains ongoing against East St. Louis Mayor Charles Powell III and City Council members Courtney Hoffman II and LaVondo Pulley.
Any damages Betts and the city owe the Muellers will be determined at a later date, according to the April 6 order.
‘No special exemption’ for government defendants
Dugan concluded that Betts and the city obstructed discovery through a series of missed deadlines and inadequate responses.
He said they failed to comply with two successive court orders, which required them to provide information that gets to the heart of the plaintiffs’ damages calculations and key liability theories:
- Emails, text messages and other electronic communications from the city employees named in the lawsuit
- Nicholas Mueller’s full compensation record, including pay stubs, pension statements and related documents
They received partial compensation records — eight months of pay stubs from 2023 — and no internal communications.
Nicholas Mueller was a police officer in East St. Louis for more than 31 years before he was promoted to assistant chief on May 1, 2023, according to the lawsuit.
Betts, the city and their counsel contended that they were not acting in bad faith in a March 24 court filing. They cited difficulties responding to the orders, including the need for City Council approvals.
Regarding the compensation documents specifically, they said they only recently learned that a third-party payroll administrator had purged records earlier than 2023.
Dugan rejected those arguments.
“Governmental defendants receive no special exemption from their (discovery) obligations merely because of internal approval processes,” he wrote. “... These obstacles could and should have been discovered and communicated to plaintiffs and the court long ago rather than ignored for nearly a full year.”
A jury trial in the case has been rescheduled from August to Nov. 2.
This story was originally published April 17, 2026 at 12:24 PM.
