Scranton Mayor Paige Cognetti, now the Democratic nominee for Pennsylvania's Eighth Congressional District, has tentatively settled a federal lawsuit brought by a longtime city worker who said she lost her job for supporting Cognetti's past rival.
The Washington Free Beacon reported the tentative deal on October 14, 2026, citing court filings and a statement from the city. The case never reached a verdict. The parties moved to end it without any admission of liability.
At stake is a core claim about public employment and political speech. Former Scranton employee Virginia Flynn alleged that city leaders punished her for First Amendment free association and free speech after she backed Chris Cullen, Cognetti's 2019 mayoral opponent. Flynn also alleged discrimination tied to age, gender, disability, and union involvement. She sought back pay, lost benefits, and damages for pain, suffering, and humiliation.
Flynn worked for Scranton government for 15 years before her 2023 termination. She sued Cognetti and the City of Scranton in 2024. Her complaint described a "campaign of harassment, intimidation, and unfounded and unfair scrutiny" after she voiced support for Cullen.
The lawsuit accused defendants of a "concerted and persistent effort... to discriminate and retaliate against" her and of creating a "hostile work environment." It said supervisors unfairly scrutinized her work and threatened termination "even for minor or non-existent infractions."
One flashpoint involved the time clock. Flynn alleged she received a verbal warning for clocking in "1 minute to 4 minutes late on several occasions." The suit said supervisors knew she "had frequent difficulty punching in because of issues with the time clock," and that "other employees were not disciplined for such de minimis infractions."
Other alleged pressure points included early clock-out after dental permission, performance issues she said fell outside her control, warnings, suspensions, and a performance improvement plan that preceded termination. Flynn also alleged an order to process a set number of checks each day even though volume depended on what the office received, and that she performed the duties of two jobs.
The complaint tied the dispute to local politics beyond City Hall. Flynn's son is Pennsylvania state senator Marty Flynn, a Cognetti critic. According to the lawsuit, Cognetti told him, "can't you just get your mom a state job and get her out of the City."
The suit framed that exchange as part of a broader effort to push Flynn out after she exercised speech and association rights in support of Cullen. The complaint stated defendants "conspired with others to retaliate against Mrs. Flynn because she exercised her First Amendment free association and free speech rights... and her exercise of free speech in support of Mr. Cullen."
Those remain allegations. No court has found them proven. The tentative settlement leaves the underlying claims unresolved on the merits.
Cognetti and the city tried to end the case early. In November 2024, a U.S. District Court judge appointed by former president Joe Biden denied their motion to dismiss. The ruling, as characterized in reporting on the memorandum order, found that allegations of political retaliation "set forth a pattern of antagonism coupled with timing to establish a causal link as with the plaintiff's other retaliation claims."
With dismissal rejected, the matter headed toward discovery. In July 2026, Flynn filed an unopposed motion for an extension of time. That filing stated the "parties are currently engaging in settlement discussions."
By mid-October 2026, city officials described a tentative agreement. Scranton city solicitor Jessica Eskra, speaking through a spokesman, said the sides had moved to close the file and limit further expense.
"parties to this action have tentatively reached an agreement to resolve this matter without any admission of liability in order to avoid the costs of further litigation. The City's insurance will cover the majority of any funds due as a result of the settlement agreement."
The spokesman did not answer follow-up questions about any taxpayer share beyond insurance. Public filings and the city statement leave the exact dollar figure unclear. Authorities have not publicly confirmed whether a court has given final approval or what remainder, if any, falls on city funds.
Cognetti's mayoral tenure and House bid put the dispute in a sharper political frame. Her campaign website says she "reformed the office" by "battling corruption in City Hall." The lawsuit painted a different picture of how dissent was handled inside city employment.
Separate Free Beacon reporting referenced in the same coverage described other controversies during her time in office. Cognetti brokered a $1.9 million deal to purchase the old Fidelity Bank Scranton headquarters. Her uncle-in-law sat on the bank board, and all nine board members contributed to her campaign.
Prior reporting also said she used her position to make a stretch of the street she lives on one-way without properly notifying city council. Residents described near-miss crashes. One neighbor said a "daughter was almost hit head on." A local trucking company said the change cost money because the alternate road was not big enough for trucks. City council criticized the move.
None of those episodes decided the Flynn case. They do show why conservatives watching Pennsylvania races track how progressive mayors wield personnel power, procurement leverage, and street-level authority while running for higher office.
A no-liability deal ends discovery risk and trial exposure. It does not adjudicate whether Flynn was fired for politics, performance, or something else. It does not test the time-clock discipline claims before a jury. It does not force a public accounting of every warning, suspension, or improvement plan entry.
Investigators and voters still face open questions the docket has not answered in public. The precise settlement amount remains undisclosed in the reporting. The size of any non-insurance payment is unknown. Personal comment from Cognetti on the allegations, beyond the solicitor's no-admission statement, is not on the record in the package. Exact termination and filing dates within 2023 and 2024 are not spelled out beyond the years.
Procedurally, the path was familiar. Complaint in 2024. Motion practice. Denial of dismissal in November 2024. Settlement talks noted by July 2026. Tentative agreement reported in October 2026 as Cognetti sought a congressional seat. Insurance covering the majority of funds due softens the immediate hit to the city budget while leaving the political optics intact.
Public employees do not surrender core speech and association rights when they take a city paycheck. Courts have long policed retaliation claims when workers allege punishment for political support or criticism. Flynn's suit put that principle on the table in Scranton and tied it to a mayor now asking voters for a promotion to Congress.
The complaint's language was blunt. It cast the termination as the end of a pattern, not a one-off HR dispute. It linked discipline for tiny lateness intervals to a larger theory of selective enforcement. It placed an alleged private remark to a state senator inside the same narrative of getting a political opponent's supporter "out of the City."
Defendants chose cost avoidance over a full airing. That choice is common in civil litigation. It also means the public record stops short of sworn testimony, cross-examination, and findings of fact on the retaliation theory a Biden-appointed judge already said was pleaded with enough pattern and timing to survive dismissal.
Cognetti enters the House race as Scranton's mayor and as a defendant who, with the city, moved to settle rather than try the case. Flynn exits as a 15-year employee whose claims of political payback, hostile conditions, and related discrimination will not be tested at trial under the tentative terms described.
Chris Cullen remains the 2019 opponent whose support Flynn said triggered the backlash. Marty Flynn remains the state senator named in the alleged job remark. Jessica Eskra's office remains the voice of the city's no-liability, insurance-first closeout.
For readers who care about equal rules in government workplaces, the sequence matters more than the spin. A worker alleges she was targeted for backing the wrong candidate. A federal judge keeps the retaliation claims alive. Years later, with a congressional nomination in hand, the mayor's city announces a tentative peace without admitting fault.
When city hall treats political loyalty as a job requirement, taxpayers inherit both the legal bill and the damaged trust. Settlements without admissions can quiet a docket. They cannot erase the question of whether public employees in Scranton were free to speak, associate, and keep their posts without fear of a purge.
