Professional Documents
Culture Documents
FILED
vs.
DEFENDANT
This case assigned to
COMPLAINT
arc5ho
HtUrl ~
COMES THE PLAINTIFF, MARY BIVENS, d/b/aB&M MOBILE HOME PARK, and
for her cause of action against the defendant states and alleges as follows:
I.
Plaintiff is a citizen of the City of Bryant, Saline County, Arkansas who resides on
Arkansas State Highway 5 North just past its intersection with Shobe Road at a postal address of
9404 State Highway 5 North, Alexander, AR 72202, the said highway being at that point an
extension of historic Stagecoach Road, as the thoroughfare is sometimes locally designated. She
and her late husband, Bennie Bivens, built and opened early in the year 1970 the mobile home
park that is the subject of this claim on property adjacent and contiguous to their home. The
couple together, and plaintiff alone after her husband's death in 2001, have continued to operate
this business without interruption.
II.
Defendant is an Arkansas City of the First Class with administrative offices located at
219 Southwest Third Street, Bryant, AR 72022 whose agent for service of process at that address
JI
is the Hon. Jill Dabbs, Mayor, with a certified copy to Mr. Chris Madison, Bryant City Staff
Attorney, also at that address.
III.
B&M Mobile Home Park consists of approximately 8.5 acres of flat, partially forested
non-flooding land of a consistency and contour particularly conducive to the placement and
maintenance of "double wide" and lesser residential trailer dwellings, some of which are owned
by their tenant occupants and others by plaintiff. Tue majority of the clients of B&M are persons
of Hispanic descent who are employed in Bryant and nearby communities as semi-skilled and
day laborers at or slightly above the minimum wage, making it difficult for them to find
affordable housing for themselves and their families, which often include small children. B&M
Mobile Home Park is one of a very few area lodgings available to such persons.
IV.
All of plaintiffs state, federal and county taxes are current and plaintiffs business has
been in good standing with all agencies since a sewerage discharge dispute was resolved with the
Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), discussed infra, in December 2010
requiring the construction at plaintiffs expense of a state of the art waste disposal pipeline which
was completed and accepted by defendant on or about January 1, 2012.
v.
This is an action for violation of plaintiffs civil rights under the Fourth, Fifth and
Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, 42 U.S.C. 1983, the Arkansas Civil
Rights Act of 1993, the Arkansas Constitution, the Arkansas common law torts of trespass, false
arrest, conversion, intentional infliction of emotional distress and interference with an
advantageous business relationship by defendant's managerial officials, officers, employees and
agents through, inter alia, the selective and capricious compilation and submission of inflated
utility invoices to plaintiff for water and sewerage services which must be passed on to her
tenants, arbitrary and selective building code and animal control enforcement citations, and the
selective and arbitrary stopping, inspection, searching and citation of plaintiffs Hispanic lessees
and their guests and others of Hispanic descent, and the impoundment of their vehicles for the
retrieval of which they must pay towing and storage fees, and otherwise engaging in the studied
harassment of persons of Hispanic heritage for the purpose of forcing them to leave the City of
Bryant. The attendant impact on plaintiffs business from these actions against her tenants has
been financially devastating.
VI.
During the fall and winter of 2010- 2011 plaintiff expended more than $250,000.00 to update
the B&M Mobile Home Park sewage system with the construction of a completely new, high
quality, state-of-the- art effluent pipeline and tie-in to connect B&M's to the defendant's
sewage system near Interstate 30. A full-time work crew excavated several tons of rocky soil
following which the pipeline was laid in strict compliance with Department of Environmental
Quality and Highway Department regulations. Defendant mandated that the plans and
specifications the project be approved by its Director of Public Works (Water & Sewer), Mr.
Monty Ledbetter, as comporting with the connection and flowage requirements of defendant's
then-existing sewage system. Throughout the more than three (3) months of construction,
plaintiff and her contractor were in constant contact with the said Ledbetter, who frequently
performed on-site inspections of the progress of the work and granted his approval, finally
accepting the entire project on or about January 1, 2012. On numerous occasions, Mr. Ledbetter
commented that the new pipeline would be a boon to the city's sewage system since other
residences would be able to connect to it for disposal of their own waste. He stated that some
allowance would be made in plaintiffs future water and sewer billings in light of this fact. While
plaintiff was under a settlement agreement with ADEQ to reconstruct her disposal system, and
no specific money amount was stated by the defendant's representative in this regard, Mr.
Ledbetter's assurances prompted plaintiff to demand of her contractor the highest quality of
material and workmanship.
VIL
Notwithstanding the forgoing, beginning within months of the completion of the new
pipeline and continuing to the present day, a period of more than three (3) years, the defendant
has not only not provided any billing allowance to plaintiff but has more than doubled its
charges to her with no allowance, in spite of the connection of an untold number of additional
residences to the line constructed by her, a connection surcharge of $39,000.00 (an arbitrary levy
which she nonetheless dutifully paid) and a number of service economies claimed by the
defendant to reduce water and sewerage charges to its other residents. When in 2013 plaintiff
complained of the increases to the defendant, she was told that the primary reason for them was a
series of faulty meters it had installed which for various reasons did not properly register B&M's
usage. She was informed that the breakdown of these devices made it impossible correctly to
gauge flow, which the defendant could only determine by estimation. In just over one year
defendant replaced its meters for plaintiffs business on three separate occasions. On March 26,
2014 plaintiff wrote to the said Ledbetter, Mr. Robert Griffin, the Chairperson of its Water and
Sewer Advisory Committee, and Mr. Buddy Fowler, its utility billing director, recounting the
foregoing facts and requesting an accounting of her water and sewer service accounts, including
the precise service and maintenance history of the three replaced meters and the effects of their
discrepancies on her billings. EXHIBIT (I). She asked to be told what amounts were billed on
estimates as opposed to actual meter data and how those estimates were arrived at. She further
asked to be informed of what other residences had been permitted to connect with the new
pipeline and for copies of their usage charges so she could compare them with her own. She
renewed her request for some billing allowance. The defendant, through Mr. Ledbetter,
responded on or about April 15, 2014 with duplicate copies of her previous invoices but provided
no direct response to her information requests. No names of additional users were provided nor
were copies of their invoices. Plaintiff responded on April 30, 2014 with an itemized reiteration
of her requests to which no response has been received.
VIII.
Defendant's code enforcement personnel, including one Doug Smith and others, have
undertaken a sustained campaign of harassment of plaintiffs Hispanic tenants for minor
discrepancies, such as cracked window panes, the absence of 2-step bannisters, unsealed portions
of roofing, yard debris and the like. Threats of home confiscation, closure and removal are
communicated to Hispanic homeowners and their stay-at-home spouses, many tending small
children.
IX.
Defendant's animal control unit has on repeated occasions ticketed to Municipal Court
owners of pets in Hispanic households allegedly found without leashes on B&M property or
whose collars and tags were temporarily removed for grooming. One dog, which had been a
member of its household for more than five (5) years, was seized and taken to the city pound
where, due to a notification delay, its owner was unable to claim it during working hours before
it was euthanized. Citations against owners of other animals, if they retain counsel, are routinely
dismissed without a hearing.
x.
Defendant's police officers, including one Scott Johnson and others, routinely pull over
and inspect vehicles with Hispanic occupants entering or leaving B&M Mobile Horne Park or
leaving or entering the highway at Shobe Road. Identification papers, including drivers licenses,
entry visas, work permits and other immigration documents are demanded for inspection without
probable cause indicating the commission of a criminal or traffic offense or improper
immigration status. Officers often congregate in their squad cars on the vacant lot at Highway 5
and Shobe Road immediately next to plaintiff's property from which they initiate these forays,
some of which result in the seizure, towing and impoundment of vehicles, necessitating payment
of exacting tow and storage fees in addition to fines for minor infractions, such as sight-safety
impediments, no insurance or title papers, and the like for which such severe preliminary
sanctions are not normally imposed on others.
XI.
The actions hereinabove described of the defendant's personnel were committed by
them in the course and scope of their employment or agency and under the official color of their
offices as empowered by the defendant, and with the awareness and/or encouragement of their
superiors, and are, therefore directly imputed to the defendant as their employer, master and/or
principal, respondeat superior.
XII.
ability to engage replacements. From some 65 lot-space leases in full payment performance on or
about January 1, 2012 B&M Mobile Home Park has fallen to fewer than 45, a loss of more than
$10, 000.00 in monthly income. Virtually to a person, departing tenants ascribe their decisions to
quit their tenancies to arbitrary police and code enforcement harassment such as that above
described and to the higher rates plaintiff has been forced to pass on to them for water and
sewage utility services. Over the past three (3) years, this has cost plaintiff more than
$430,000.00 in lost revenue on top of the excessive water and sewerage charges themselves, for
all of which she prays compensatory damages in an amount reasonably and fairly to compensate
her for her losses.
XIII.
As a direct and proximate result of the said actions of the defendant plaintiff has suffered
a substantial loss in the market value of her property, impairing her ability to sell it at a fair and
reasonable price through two (2) separate commercial realtors over the past three (3) years,
increased administrative and managerial costs in its operation and in attorneys fees, as well as
harm to the property's reputation and public image as a secure family lodging space for working
people, for all of which she also prays compensatory damages in fair and reasonable amount..
XIV.
As a direct and proximate result of the defendant's actions, plaintiff has suffered mental
anguish and emotional distress, headaches, nervousness, loss of sleep and depression, including
the fear of bankruptcy and the loss of her entire estate built up over many years, for all of which
she also prays compensatory damages in a fair and reasonable amount.
xv.
The above described actions of the defendant through its employees, officers and agents
constituted willful and wanton misconduct, for which plaintiff further prays for an award of
exemplary damages.
WHEREFORE, ALL PREMISES CONSIDERED, plaintiff prays judgment against the
defendant in an amount of damages greater than $75,000.00 exclusive of interest and costs
sufficient to compensate her for her losses, for an Order permanently enjoining the defendant
from such conduct in the future and for all other appropriate relief to which she shall be entitled.
Plaintiff further prays for an award of exemplary damages against the defendant in an
amount sufficient to deter it and other municipalities and those acting under co1or of their
authority from such conduct in the future.
Plaintiff Moves the Court for an Interim Order restraining the defendant from suspending
water and- sewage services to her property pending the resolution of this cause and for a
Scheduling Order expediting discovery, and for a preliminary Hearing.
Plaintiff reserves the right to plead further upon discovery.
SandyS.McM
AR Bar No. 66 49
Mary Bivens
B&M Mobile Home Park
9404 Highway 5 North
Alexander, AR 72002-8527
EXHIBIT (1)
It was necessary for a full-time pipeline crew to excavate tons of rocky earth then lay the
pipeline in strict compliance with ADEQ and Highway Department regulations. Plans for the
project had to be approved by Mr. Ledbetter as comporting with connection and flowage
requirements for the then-existing Bryant sewer system. This was done, and the new system was
completed by us and accepted by him shortly thereafter, on or about March 1 2011. Your records
will reflect the exact date and the results of the many inspections that were conducted as the
work progressed as well as the final inspection before acceptance.
During this project we were of necessity in regular contact with Mr. Ledbetter who
frequently acknowledged that the new pipeline would be a boon to the city's sewage system
since any number of homes both old and new would be able to connect to it for disposal of their
own waste. While he made no specific promise of compensation, he did indicate that some
allowance would be made by the city in our future water and sewage billings in view of the large
expenditure involved in building a system that would be of long term use to the city in servicing
other residents. I did not entirely rely on such for the building of the pipeline, since it was
necessary for us to comply with ADEQ standards, but it was a factor in determining the quality
of the materials and workmanship. Nothing was spared in other words to make sure it was
completed in exemplary fashion.
Over the ensuing months, however, it has become apparent that not only have I not
received any billing consideration for the project, but that my water and sewage charges have
rapidly increased, proportionately it seems to a greater extent by far than other homeowners. The
billings have also been unpredictable and erratic. Enclosed, for example, is a print-out of charges
for the years 2010 through 2013. One can quickly see that our sewer charges total for 2013 are
almost $20,000.00 greater than those for 2011 ($49, 832.63 compared to $30, 069.65). One
would have expected a comparable rise in water billings, but they fell by half, from some
$32, 000 in 2011 to approximately $16,000 in 2013. The reason we were informally told by
Water Department employees was due to a series of faulty meters which did not properly register
our usage. This "would be corrected" we were told for the current year, but we were not told
exactly how this could be done. When I inquired later on this issue, I was told that it was simply
not possible to get an accurate reading from the water meters and that "some estimating" would
have to be done. In just over a year, the city replaced its water meter on our property three (3)
separate times.
In view of the the foregoing and the considerable hardship continued rising water and seage
charges are causing me, I respectfully ask for a full accounting of my water and sewage service
on the above accounts. As a part of this accounting I wish to know the precise service and
maintenance history of each of the three replaced meters, including exactly why they were
displaced, who examined them and what broken or defective parts were found and the effect of
those defects on our usage numbers for the times in question.
I also need to know when we were billed based not on meter readings but on usage
estimates and how those estimates were arrived at.
I also want to know how many other homes and businesses are now tied into the new
pipeline I paid for and what their annual usage charges are so I can compare them to my own.
I also want to know if you plan to give me some allowance for having built and paid for the
new sewage pipeline and tie in.
It is very respectfully requested that I be provided with this information in time to appear
before the Water and Sewage Advisory Committee at its May 2014 meeting the first Tuesday of
that month.
Sincerely yours,
JS 44 (Rev. 12/12)
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is reqmred for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civiLdocket sheet (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS
DEFENDANTS
Sandy S. McMath
711 West 3d StreetSOl-396-5414
Little Rock AR 72201
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an ''.X" in One Box Only)
02
U.S. Government
Plaintiff
'*1
Federal Question
(US Government Not a Party)
U.S. Government
Defendant
04
Diversity
(Indicate Citizenship ofParties in Item III)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
110 Insurance
120 Marine
130 Miller Act
140 Negotiable Instrument
150 Recovery of Overpayment
& Enforcement of Judgment
151 Medicare Act
152 Recovery of Defaulted
Student Loans
(Excludes Veterans)
153 Recovery of Overpayment
of Veteran's Benefits
160 Stockholders' Suits
190 Other Contract
195 Contract Product Liability
196 Franchise
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5t
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
J -~-~
0 2
0 5
0 3
Foreign Nation
0 6
r.
,,.
PERSONAL INJURY
310 Airplane
315 Airplane Product
Liability
320 Assault, Libel &
Slander
330 Federal Employers'
Liability
340 Marine
345 Marine Product
Liability
350 Motor Vehicle
3 55 Motor Vehicle
Product Liability
360 Other Personal
Injwy
362 Personal Injury Medical Malpractice
PERSONAL INJURY
0 365 Personal Injwy Product Liability
0 367 Health Care/
Pharmaceutical
Personal Injwy
Product Liability
0 368 Asbestos Personal
Injury Product
Liability
PERSONAL PROPERTY
0 3 70 Other Fraud
0 371 Truth in Lending
0 380 Other Personal
Property Damage
0 385 Property Damage
Product Liability
,jc,;,
0
0
0
0
0
DEF
ii ix 1
01
_S_a~l_i__n_e~-----
Habeas Corpus:
0 463 Alien Detainee
0 510 Motions to Vacate
Sentence
0 530 General
0 535 Death Penalty
Other:
0 540 Mandamus & Other
0 550 Civil Rights
0 555 Prison Condition
0 560 Civil Detainee Conditions of
Confinement
"''
0 820 Copyrights
0 830 Patent
0 840 Trademark
,,,~
0
0
0
0
0
.:.w"
0
0
0
0
:.U: 0
0
0
'~Wl.EoCoF-,~"
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Original
Proceeding
0 2 Removed from
State Court
Remanded from
Appellate Court
0 4 Reinstated or
Reopened
0 5 Transferred from
Another District
0 6 Multidistrict
Litigation
(specify)
e.ff~s:i~i(f~1'1~Jwhich you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
vio lattn
VII. REQUESTED IN
COMPLAINT:
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
IFANY
JURY DEMAND:
DOCKET NUMBER
DATE
RECEIPT#
AMOUNT
APPLYING IFP
tenantS'ci vil
JUDGE
MAG.JUDGE
0 Yes
0 No
right