Bethune v. United States Dept. of Housing & Urban Dev.

376 F. Supp. 1074, 1972 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14784
CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri
DecidedMarch 7, 1972
DocketCiv. A. 19919-3
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 376 F. Supp. 1074 (Bethune v. United States Dept. of Housing & Urban Dev.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bethune v. United States Dept. of Housing & Urban Dev., 376 F. Supp. 1074, 1972 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14784 (W.D. Mo. 1972).

Opinion

FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND JUDGMENT

WILLIAM H. BECKER, Chief Judge.

Now on this 23rd day of February, 1972, the same being one of the regular days of the regular session of this Court, this cause came on for trial. The plaintiffs, Ann Bethune and Darrell J. Bethune, Clell Lawrence and Shirley Lawrence, Martha J. McKee, Homer E. Reinking and Leona M. Reinking, Ellis A. Sheets, Robert Sykes and Ruth Ann Sykes appeared in person and by counsel, Howard E. Bodney and William L. Turner, of Gage, Tucker, Hodges, Kreamer, Kelly & Varner. Intervening plaintiffs Roland L. Ham and Bernice L. Ham appeared in person and by attorney James E. Cooling of Dietrich, Davis, Burrell, Dicus & Rowlands. Intervening plaintiffs James B. Devaney and Olivette F. Devaney appeared in person and by counsel William J. Gilwee. Defendants United States of America, Department of Housing and Urban Development, George Romney, Harry Sharrott and William R. Southerland appeared not but were represented by the Assistant United States Attorney, Vernon Poschel. Defendants Jackson County, Missouri, George Lehr, Harry Wiggins and Joe Bolger, Jr. appeared not but were represented by counsel, Richard F. Schmidt, Assistant Jackson County Counselor.

A pretrial conference was held at which time Pretrial Order No. 2 was executed by the Court and entered upon the record. Further stipulations were made by and between the parties,, transcribed and entered upon the record.

And thereupon, said cause was taken up and submitted to the Court upon the proceedings and the proof adduced and the Court, having heard the evidence and *1076 considered the stipulations of the parties finds:

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. That the plaintiffs and intervening plaintiffs are and at all material times were owners of improved real property within the area proposed to be taken by Jackson County, Missouri, as and for a public park to be known as the Blue-Grey or Southeastern Jackson County Park, each parcel of which has and at all relevant times had a value in excess of Ten Thousand and 00/100 ($10,000.00) Dollars.

2. That on March 29, 1971, defendants Lehr, Wiggins and Bolger, for and on behalf of Jackson County, Missouri, executed a resolution assuring the Department of Housing and Urban Development that the land acquisition and relocation policy provisions of Title 42, U.S.C.A., Section 4601 et seq. would be followed by Jackson County, Missouri.

3. That during the months of March, April and May of 1971, defendant Jackson County, Missouri, caused said property to be appraised.

4. That some of the plaintiffs and intervening plaintiffs at the time of said appraisal were not given an opportunity by the appraisers to accompany them during their inspection of said properties and that the remaining plaintiffs and intervening plaintiffs were not given a full and reasonable opportunity by the appraisers to accompany them during their inspection of the properties.

5. That defendant Jackson County, Missouri, subsequent to said appraisal and during the months of June and July offered to plaintiffs and intervening plaintiffs various sums of money for said improved real property, all of which sums with the exception of that sum offered to plaintiff Martha J. McKee, were less than the highest appraisal of said improved real property.

6. That on July 27, 1971, a document entitled “Statement and Summary” was mailed to and received by plaintiffs and intervening plaintiffs, which document contained definitions of the methods of appraisals that had been made but which did not state or summarize the basis for the compensation offered to said plaintiffs and intervening plaintiffs.

7. That defendant Jackson County, Missouri, failed and refused to negotiate with plaintiffs and intervening plaintiffs for the acquisition of said improved real property nor did they allow said parties to examine the appraisals that had been made or present evidence of the value of their property.

8. That on August 19, 1971, defendants United States of America Department of Housing and Urban Development and Jackson County, Missouri, entered into a contract for a grant to Jackson County, Missouri, of Federal monies to acquire and/or develop land for open space purposes under Title VII of the Housing Act of 1961, as amended, whereby and wherein the assurances given by Jackson County, Missouri as aforesaid, were recited.

9. That on August 18, 1971, and on August 26, 1971, defendant Jackson County by and through the Jackson County Court authorized the filing of lawsuits for the condemnation of the improved real property of plaintiffs and intervening plaintiffs.

10. That on 'September 7, 1971, defendant Jackson County, Missouri, filed two lawsuits in the Circuit Court of Missouri, Sixteenth Judicial Circuit thereby seeking to condemn the improved real property of plaintiffs Martha J. McKee, Darrell J. Bethune and Ann Bethune and Ellis A. Sheets and Georgianna Sheets, Clell Lawrence and Shirley Lawrence, Homer E. Reinking and Leona M. Rein-king and intervening plaintiffs James B. Devaney and Olivette F. Devaney and Roland L. Ham and Bernice L. Ham.

11. That on September 16, 1971, defendant Jackson County, Missouri filed a lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Missouri, Sixteenth Judicial Circuit seeking condemnation of the improved real property *1077 of plaintiffs Robert Sykes and Ruth Ann Sykes.

12. That defendant Jackson County, Missouri failed to provide to said parties adequate relocation assistance by way of advice and information with regard to comparable property in the area which could be purchased by plaintiffs and intervening plaintiffs.

13. That plaintiffs and intervening plaintiffs have incurred and expended various sums as attorney’s fees and for appraisal fees in defending said actions in the Circuit Court of Missouri, which sums are fair and reasonable and cannot be recovered by them in said action.

14. That defendant United States of America Department of Housing and Urban Development prior to the submission of this cause to the Court represented to the Court that they were presently requiring Jackson County, Missouri to comply with proposed interim guidelines set forth in Exhibit O of Standard Pretrial Order No. 2 which includes a written communication dated February 11, 1972, from S. Leigh Curry, Associate General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, D. C. to Harry I. Sharrott, Regional Administrator, Region VII (Kansas City).

15. That defendant Jackson County, Missouri has represented to the Court that it will comply with the request of defendant Department of Housing and Urban Development, contained in said Exhibit 0.

16. That plaintiffs and intervening plaintiffs have incurred and expended various sums as and for attorney fees in connection with the prosecution of this action, which fees are fair and reasonable under the circumstances.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. That this Court has jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject matter.

2.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

City of Columbia v. Baurichter
713 S.W.2d 263 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1986)
Bunker Properties, Inc. v. Kemp
524 F. Supp. 109 (D. Kansas, 1981)
Neil Leist, Philip Smith and Incomco v. John Richard Simplot, J. R. Simplot & Co., Simplot Products Co., Inc., Simplot Industries, Inc., Simtag Farms, Inc., Peter J. Taggares, P. J. Taggares & Co., Henry A. Pollack, Harvey B. Pollack, Harvey B. Pollack Company, Gerald Rafferty, Pressner Trading Corp., Benjamin Pressner, Stephen Sundheimer, Jules Nordlight, Edelstein & Co., Inc., Charles Edelstein, Robert Edelstein, Murial Edelstein, Meierfeld & Company, Inc., Gilbert Meierfeld, David Meierfeld, Robert Reardon, F. J. Reardon, Inc., Harold Collins, Caspar Mayerson, Lynnewood Exporting Company, Alex Sinclair, Manning Stoller, Hornblower & Weeks-Hemphill, Noyes Inc., Mfx Commodities, Inc., Donald Silver, Duane South, Kenneth Ramm, a & B Farming Inc., Hugh Glenn, Gearheart Farming, Inc., Edward McKay "John" Humphreys, Frank Fullmer, Clayton Brokerage Co. Of St. Louis, Inc., Heinold Commodities, Inc., Thomson & McKinnon Auchincloss, Kohlmeyer, Inc., New York Mercantile Exchange, Richard B. Levine, Howard Gabler, Alfred Pennisi, Incomco v. Wayne County Produce Co., and Harold Collins, New York Mercantile Exchange, National Super Spuds, Inc., William R. Buster, Jr., Willard C. Chiner, Eugene P. Weismen, Richard Welts, Raymond Rothberg, Arthur S. Armstrong, Theodore Brinek, Capgain Holdings, Inc., and Heiz Romminger, Individually and on Behalf of All Persons Similarly Situated v. New York Mercantile Exchange, Clayton Brokerage Co. Of St. Louis, Inc., Pressner Trading Corp., Jack Richard Simplot, J. R. Simplot Co., Simplot Industries, Inc., Peter J. Taggares, P. J. Taggares Co., C. L. Otter, Simtag Farms, Kenneth Ramm, a & B Farms, Inc., Hugh v. Glenn, Gearheart Farming, Inc. And Ed McKay Heinold Commodities, Inc., Thompson & McKinnon Auchincloss, Kohlmeyer, Inc.
638 F.2d 283 (Second Circuit, 1981)
Leist v. Simplot
638 F.2d 283 (Second Circuit, 1980)
Department of Transportation v. Zabel
362 N.E.2d 687 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1977)
Boston v. United States
424 F. Supp. 259 (E.D. Missouri, 1976)
Paramount Farms, Inc. v. Rogers C. B. Morton
527 F.2d 1301 (Seventh Circuit, 1975)
State Ex Rel. Weatherby Advertising Co. v. Conley
527 S.W.2d 334 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1975)
Nall Motors, Inc. v. IOWA CITY, IOWA
410 F. Supp. 111 (S.D. Iowa, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
376 F. Supp. 1074, 1972 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14784, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bethune-v-united-states-dept-of-housing-urban-dev-mowd-1972.