Wayne County ethics board dismisses former employee’s complaint over alleged forged signatures

Linda Jurell, a former Wayne County sheriff’s office employee, told the Wayne County Ethics Board she found what she says were unauthorized signatures in her personnel records and in a T‑Mobile account and accused HR personnel of mishandling her medical‑leave paperwork.

The board heard Jurell’s statement at a public meeting on Dec. 17, 2025, during which she described submitting original signed hard copies and later receiving electronic DocuSign signatures she said were not hers. “I did not accept or authorize. I did not sign,” Jurell said, describing two DocuSign signatures sent in January and another that appeared March 30. She said a matching signature and signature ID later appeared in her T‑Mobile account and that the situation contributed to her resignation on May 16, 2024.

The complaint named Antisha Brown, identified in Jurell’s filings as her HR liaison. Jurell said Brown had emailed her the disputed signature multiple times and that she asked Brown to resend a blank DocuSign so she could append her own signature; that request, she said, was ignored. Jurell also told the board she experienced what she described as denial of accommodations, reduced accrued hours and loss of short‑ and long‑term disability benefits.

Mr. Longstreet, the board’s attorney, summarized the board’s prior review and told members the record still lacked evidence tying the disputed signatures to any particular employee. “At this time … the evidence still falls short,” he said, noting Jurell acknowledged clicking a DocuSign field that caused an automatic signature to generate and that the electronic‑signature behavior she described could indicate the signatures were created in that process.

Board members asked Jurell for clarifying exhibits and for any documentation that could identify who created or transmitted the signature; Jurell offered to provide copies of her hard‑copy documents and referenced a T‑Mobile staffer (Jacory King) and benefits/disability contacts (including Dorian Hoskins) as people she had communicated with while trying to resolve the issue.

After questions and discussion about motive and harm, a board member moved to adopt the attorney’s recommendation to keep the complaint dismissed; another member seconded the motion. The board voted in favor and the motion passed. Chair Lewis thanked Jurell for appearing and said the board had found no indication in the submitted evidence of a violation of the ordinance.

The board also received an update that a working group will meet to develop a timeline for proposed ethics‑ordinance amendments and heard staff note that several improperly filed complaints had been returned to complainants for proper resubmission. The meeting concluded after a vote to adjourn.

What happens next

The board’s action was a procedural dismissal for insufficient evidence; the Ethics Board did not open a new investigation nor issue any sanctions. Complainants who wish to pursue further review may be directed to submit additional documentary evidence or to other government authorities for investigation, as discussed by the board.