“Oh laugh, Curtin, old boy. It’s a great joke played on us by the Lord, or fate, or nature, whatever you prefer. But whoever or whatever played it certainly had a sense of humor. Ha! The gold has gone back to where we found it! This is worth ten months of suffering and labor, this joke is!”

                     — The Treasure of the Sierra Madre

Today’s cosmic joke is on a pair of Vermont Republicans, locked in battle over a disputed debt from a doomed campaign. But unlike Curtin and the old coot, these guys ain’t laughin’ — they’re headed to the Big Dry Empty of civil court. Trial is scheduled to begin on Monday, June 3; bring your popcorn.

In one corner: Jeff Bartley, cromulent political functionary and current chair of the Chittenden County Republican Party. Mr. Bartley is a prime example of a certain type of modern Republican: the post-collegiate ideologue who somehow latches onto one political job after another in spite of a long track record of failure. (See also: Corry Bliss, Jim Barnett.)

In the other corner: the campaign organization of Len Britton, Taftsville businessman and hapless challenger to Sen. Patrick Leahy in the 2010 election. As you may recall, Britton barely managed to crack 30% of the vote in losing to St. Patrick by a better than 2-to-1 margin. Britton’s campaign accumulated a war chest of barely $200,000, while Leahy spent 14 times that amount.

Bartley was the captain of that particular Titanic. And he considers himself underpaid.

But here’s the best part of this embarrassment: Jeff Bartley originally filed his lawsuit on October 27, 2010 — five days before Election Day. He had, by that point, left the campaign (perhaps because he wasn’t getting paid), but still — a Republican activist who’s now a Republican official shanking a top Republican candidate in the closing days of a campaign?

The capper: On that same day, Bartley filed an affidavit with the court seeking immediate payment on the grounds that Britton was “a likely unsuccessful candidate for U.S. Senate” and was likely to dissolve his campaign and stash any leftover funds to avoid his debts.

Bartley — who’s now in an influential party position — throws his own party’s candidate under the bus just before the election.

That’s just shameful.

After the jump: more details on the case.  

The documents in Bartley Consulting LLC v. Len Britton for Vermont LLC reveal a comedy of errors on both sides. To start with, Britton’s first campaign manager was one Dan Riley. During Riley’s tenure, in November 2009, Bartley was hired as Deputy Campaign Manager.

In April 2010, Britton and Riley parted ways and, according to a Bartley affidavit, “Len Britton for Vermont, LLC verbally asked me to… take on the position of campaign manager.” Remember that “verbally” part; it’s crucial to the case. The same affidavit says Bartley’s tenure as campaign manager continued “through September 2010”.

At this point, I should mention that the Britton campaign also owes a substantial amount of money to Riley.  According to its own Federal Election Commission filings, the unpaid balance to Riley is $16,577. You may well take this as evidence that Bartley’s claims are true, and that Britton is a welsher. I wouldn’t argue with that interpretation.

Britton’s defense rests on that word “verbally.” Because Jeff Bartley, campaign “expert”, has been unable to produce a signed contract for his services as campaign manager. That’s left the door open for Britton to assert that there never was a contract, and hence Britton is not legally bound to pay.

In the absence of a contract, Bartley’s complaint relies on the Britton campaign’s FEC filings, which list an obligation to Bartley Consulting to the tune of $31,072.67 as well as the $16,577 debt to Riley.

Britton’s rejoinder comes by way of his campaign treasurer, Charles Taylor. He claims that the FEC filings don’t prove a thing. And how does he explain that? In a court affidavit, Taylor says he was unsure about how to list a disputed debt on the FEC form, so he discussed it with an FEC official:

I was told that, in essence, disputation notwithstanding, Defendant was nevertheless required to report the amount of monies claimed due by Plaintiff.

This is another pesky “verbal” thing. As far as can be determined from court records, Taylor has no written documentation of the FEC’s alleged stance.

Yeesh. Talk about the gang that couldn’t shoot straight.

Let’s sum up this laughable situation. We have a guy who served as a campaign manager for six months without a written contract. And who had no discernible positive effect on his candidate’s chances. We have a candidate who allegedly owes money to not one, but two former campaign managers, both of whom left in mid-campaign. And nobody in the case kept proper written records.

We also have a legal dispute that’s limped along since October 2010 with no resolution, an open festering sore on the Vermont Republican Party. The principals are a top Republican official and a former statewide candidate who, even if he never runs for office again, ought to be a reliable source of funds for the VTGOP. But if I were Len Britton, I wouldn’t be getting out my checkbook on behalf of a party that appointed Jeff Bartley to an influential post. Bartley being, after all, his antagonist in a two-and-a-half-year-long legal battle. Not to mention the guy who piloted Britton’s campaign into an iceberg.

Ladies and gentlemen, your Vermont Republican Party.