EAST ST. LOUIS – Attorney David Cates of Swansea has chosen not to litigate nurse Keith Werner’s suit claiming a California company cheated taxpayers on medical bills. 

Cates, son of Presiding Judge Judy Cates of the Fifth District appellate court, moved on May 24 to dismiss without prejudice Werner’s claims against CEP America. 

Werner sued CEP America and 11 affiliates in U.S. district court last year, seeking damages and civil penalties under the False Claims Act. 

The Act allows citizens to sue on behalf of government to recover amounts that vendors received through fraudulent claims. 

Cates alleged in the complaint that doctors working for CEP America charged Medicare and Medicaid for more expensive services than they performed, a process identified as “upcoding.” 

Werner is an intensive care nurse at Belleville Memorial Hospital with 33 years experience, according to the lawsuit. 

Cates wrote that Werner discovered the fraud in records he examined at Memorial. The fraud was alleged to have occurred in Illinois, California, Georgia, Maryland, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and the District of Columbia. 

He notified the U.S. Department of Justice and attorney generals of the seven states that they could intervene. 

No one intervened, and Maryland asked for dismissal of any claims on its behalf. 

This March, CEP America counsel Robert Rhoad of Princeton, N.J., responded to the suit. 

In a motion to dismiss, Rhoad wrote that Werner couldn’t distinguish a medical record from a billing record. 

He wrote that the allegations failed to meet a requirement that fraud be pleaded with particularity. 

He also wrote that public accusation of fraud can do great damage to a firm before it is exonerated in litigation. 

Cates moved in April for an extension of time to respond, and Magistrate Judge Donald Wilkerson set a May 31 deadline. 

A week ahead of the deadline, Cates pulled the plug on Werner’s action.

MOUNT VERNON – Fifth District appellate judges who could have sanctioned a lawyer in a discovery dispute scolded many lawyers and judges instead. 

In a May 16 decision, they warned both sides in civil litigation to stop objecting to discovery requests on grounds they don’t intend to defend. 

“In our view, an attorney abuses the discovery process when he or she asserts a litany of grounds for objection to discovery without any intention or ability to defend those grounds,” wrote Presiding Justice Judy Cates. 

“The apparent willingness of opposing counsel and trial courts to accept this tactical approach as ‘status quo’ fuels an already strong temptation to make stock, frivolous objections to discovery requests. 

“This interferes with the efficient and expeditious administration of the pending case, and negatively impacts the other cases on the court’s docket. 

“When a trial court is presented with a motion to rule on objections or discovery matters, the court must promptly rule on those matters. 

“The failure to issue a ruling, and where appropriate, to impose sanctions, constitutes an abuse of the court’s discretion, and an abdication of its authority and responsibility.” 

Justices Thomas Welch and Richard Goldenhersh concurred. 

The case that triggered the lecture started in St. Clair County, in 2010, when Valentine and Christina Zagorski sued Allstate Insurance. 

The Zagorskis claimed Allstate improperly denied coverage for a fire at their home in Fairview Heights. 

The couple denied Allstate’s assertion that they started the fire. 

They served interrogatories asking: 

• If any Illinois court in the prior five years assessed fees, costs, penalties or fines against Allstate;

• If any insured sued Allstate in Illinois in five years alleging it failed to pay a fire loss claim;

• For any policy manual in effect at the time of the fire for handling fire loss claims; and

• For any claims at the state insurance department in five years alleging improper practices in fire loss claims. 

The Zagorskis didn’t get answers but they didn’t complain until 2012, when they moved to compel a deposition of Allstate attorney Robert Brady, from Brown and James. 

Their attorney, John Leskera of Collinsville, also asked then circuit judge Lloyd Cueto to inspect Allstate’s claims log in his chambers. 

Brady opposed the deposition and invoked privilege over all entries in the log after the date the Zagorskis filed suit. 

Cueto ruled they couldn’t depose him but they could direct interrogatories to him. He then granted privilege to entries in the claims log after the filing of the suit. 

Leskera served interrogatories on Brady about his involvement in Allstate claims, his firm’s involvement, and Allstate cases he tried to verdict. 

Allstate objected, asserting privilege. 

On Sept. 5, 2012, Cueto held a hearing on the new interrogatories about Brady and the four original ones about Allstate. 

Cueto sustained some objections and overruled others. 

Then he retired, and the case passed to Circuit Judge Andrew Gleeson. 

Allstate moved for reconsideration of Cueto’s order, and Gleeson denied it at a hearing on Feb. 20, 2013. 

He gave Allstate 30 days to comply. 

Four months later, Allstate and Brady moved for a friendly contempt order against themselves “for purposes of facilitating appellate review.” 

They couldn’t appeal a discovery order because it wouldn’t count as a final order, but they could appeal a contempt order as final. 

At a hearing on June 25, 2013, Gleeson asked Brady what was so unique about the order that would subject it to interlocutory review. 

According to Cates, “Brady replied that he had never before been ordered to produce attorney client privilege information in a first party arson case.” 

Gleeson held Brady in civil contempt on Jan. 3, 2014, fined him $25 a day, and stayed the sanction pending appeal. 

Cueto’s order mystified Cates, who found “inconsistencies and ambiguities which make the rulings unclear.” 

“There is no transcript of proceedings in the record, and so we are left to sort out the rulings with little information about the trial court’s true intention,” she wrote. 

Cates also found no rationale for the word “or” appearing between two valid subjects of discovery, implying that the Zagorskis had to choose between them. 

She wrote that Cueto recrafted the four original interrogatories without addressing subparts of two. 

She wrote that Allstate objected to interrogatories as overly broad, burdensome, irrelevant, work product, and subject to attorney client privilege. 

“There is nothing in the record indicating that Allstate attempted to defend on any of these grounds, other than relevance,” she wrote. 

Cates directed Gleeson to order an answer, and there the lecture began. 

“Our discovery rules provide procedural tools to educate the parties in advance of trial about the merits of their claims and defenses and to promote the prompt and just disposition of litigation,” Cates wrote. 

“When an objection to a discovery request is based on relevance, the party seeking the discovery has the obligation to establish how the discovery requested is relevant. 

“When an objection is based on attorney client privilege or work product privilege, the objecting party has the burden to specifically identify the privilege, and must submit a privilege log describing the nature of the documents, communications, or things not produced, and the exact privilege being claimed. 

“When the objection is based on the grounds that the interrogatory is overly broad, burdensome, or harassing, once again, it is the objecting party that has the obligation to offer an adequate defense to the grounds claimed. 

“In the face of discovery abuses, it is incumbent upon the opposing party to promptly request relief, and it is incumbent upon the trial court to consider the request, and, where indicated, to issue orders that will discourage further abuse.” 

The Justices vacated Brady’s $25 daily fine, which would have topped $30,000. 

They ruled that his conduct was not contumacious, meaning he didn’t stubbornly resist authority.

Former U.S. Attorney Stephen Wigginton has been appointed to represent a three-member panel that will decide whether a property tax cut proposal can go before Madison County voters in November.

A hearing that had been set to begin at 10 a.m. Tuesday at the Madison County courthouse was recessed to executive session because three of four lawyers on record in the case were not present.

Granite City attorney William Schooley, who represents objectors Bennett Dickmann and Richard Gillespie, was on hand for his clients in their challenge to the validity of signatures collected by proponents of the referendum.

Madison County Clerk Debra Ming-Mendoza, who serves as the panel's chairperson by statute, told the gallery that Wigginton would be arriving later. She also said that attorneys for the defendants - James Craney and Don Weber - were absent due to Weber's illness and Craney being called out of town.

Wigginton, who stepped down as federal prosecutor in December to take a position at Armstrong Teasdale in St. Louis, will serve as counsel to the electoral board. Other members of the panel include former Madison County associate judge James Hackett and former assistant state's attorney Stephanie Robbins.

Organizers of the property tax cut referendum recently gathered nearly 10,000 signatures to get the question on reducing the levy to voters in the general election. They collected approximately 2,000 more signatures than was required in order to withstand objections - which ultimately came, and which is the matter pending before Ming-Mendoza's panel.

Objectors argue that close to 30 percent of signatures collected are invalid, and that, therefore, the referendum cannot go forth to voters in the upcoming election.

The referendum question has become a battleground issue for the future governance of Madison County. Sides are lining up either with Republican Kurt Prenzler, a lead organizer who says the county is over-taxing property owners, or with Democrat incumbent Board Chairman Alan Dunstan, whose allies say the cut would reduce funding for law enforcement.

EDWARDSVILLE — A couple's lawsuit against a doctor alleges negligence and insufficient measures taken to prevent injuries.

Mary Berger and Phil Berger filed a complaint on May 24 in Madison County Circuit Court against Patrick Masching, M.D. alleging that the physician failed to provide proper medical care to Mary Berger.

According to the complaint, the plaintiffs allege that, on June 21, 2014, Masching failed to take steps that would have led to a proper diagnosis of a lung disorder. Phil Berger claims loss of consortium.

The plaintiffs seek judgment against the defendant in an amount in excess of $50,000 plus court costs. They are represented by John J. Hopkins of John J. Hopkins & Associates, P.C. in Alton.

Madison County Circuit Court case number 16L713

EDWARDSVILLE — A woman is suing another driver and that driver's insurer, alleging negligence and insufficient measures taken to prevent injuries.

Marsha Cooperider filed a complaint on May 23 in Madison County Circuit Court against David King and Acceptance Auto Insurance, alleging that King failed to properly control his vehicle.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that, on Feb. 11, she suffered personal injuries and damages to her vehicle as a result of a collision. The plaintiff holds David King and Acceptance Auto Insurance responsible because King allegedly collided with plaintiff's vehicle and the defendant's insurance reduced the total amount to be paid to plaintiff from 100% to 60%.

The plaintiff seeks judgment against the defendants for the sum of $6,622, punitive damages and any further relief as this court sees fit. She is represented by David W. Dugan of David W. Dugan P.C. Attorney at Law in East Alton.

Madison County Circuit Court case number 16L714

EDWARDSVILLE — A mother of a minor child is suing the Belleville Area Special Services Cooperative, a school organization, citing alleged breach of duty.

Deitrick Oliver, a minor, by and through his mother, Velma Oliver, filed a complaint on May 12 in Madison County Circuit Court against The Bellville Area Special Services Cooperative alleging that the school organization allegedly breached its non-delegable duty.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that on May 20, 2014, Deitrick Oliver, a minor with developmental disabilities, was placed in a small padded room called the Blue Room. After being placed in the room, teacher's aide Portrait Pettigrew entered the room, pushing Deitrick against the side and back walls of the room and forcibly choking him around the neck and throat with both of her hands, the suit alleges. The plaintiff holds the Belleville Area Special Services Cooperative responsible because the defendant allegedly negligently hired Portrait Pettigrew, a certified violent offender against youth, failed to provide Deitrick a safe educational environment and disregarded students' safety.

The plaintiff requests a trial by jury and seeks judgment against the defendant in an amount in excess of $50,000. She is represented by Jason R. Caraway of Kolker Law Offices PC in Belleville, Illinois and Matthew J. Marlen of Matthew J. Marlen PC in Belleville.

Madison County Circuit Court Case number 16L259

EDWARDSVILLE — A woman is suing Alton Multispecialist, Ltd., James A. Kliefoth, M.D., Alton Memorial Hospital and Mary Schmidt, M.D., medical care providers, citing alleged negligence and medical malpractice.

Belinda Lenon filed a complaint on May 25 in Madison County Circuit Court against the defendants, alleging that they failed to provide proper and adequate medical care.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that on May 29, 2014, after undergoing exploratory surgery, she suffered sepsis and required admission to the intensive care unit and extended hospitalization. She was also required to undergo multiple, additional surgeries and procedures, medical care and treatment, the suit says. The plaintiff holds Alton Multispecialist, Ltd., James A. Kliefoth, M.D., Alton Memorial Hospital and Mary Schmidt, M.D. responsible because the defendants allegedly failed to adequately assess her condition, failed to timely order and obtain a CT scan of her abdomen and pelvis, failed to timely inform her of her condition and failed to timely perform exploratory surgery.

The plaintiff requests a trial by jury and seeks judgment against all defendants in a sum in excess of $50,000 and costs of this suit. She is represented by Millikan A. Wright of Millikan Wright LLC in St. Louis.

Madison County Circuit Court case number 2016L000723

Attorney Courtney Stirrat of Maryville, who withdrew from a federal suit against a business she once defended, continues to litigate against it in Madison County. 

In April, Circuit Judge Dennis Ruth denied a motion to disqualify her as counsel to plaintiff William Martin in an injury suit against SCF Lewis & Clark Fleeting. 

“Defendant has not alleged any involvement by Ms. Stirrat in the present case that would necessitate the disqualification of plaintiff’s counsel,” Ruth wrote. 

“Ms. Stirrat did not work on plaintiff’s case while employed, as an associate attorney, at a prior defense firm retained by defendant. 

“Rather, she appears to have handled recurrent garden variety maritime injury cases of a similar type. 

“Defendant has failed to show that any of those cases involved the same or substantially the same matter.” 

In a federal court suit against an affiliate, SCF Lewis & Clark Marine, the question of her disqualification never came to a hearing. 

She withdrew in January, a day after the defendant moved to disqualify her. 

In each case, SCF Lewis & Clark also sought to disqualify the entire firm of Armbruster Dripps, where she works. 

When Ruth denied Stirrat’s disqualification, he also denied it for the firm. 

As of May 27, the motion to disqualify the firm from the federal suit remained pending before District Judge Staci Yandle. 

She plans a bench trial starting Aug. 1, for plaintiff Anthony Miskel. 

After Stirrat withdrew from the suit, retired U.S. district judge Patrick Murphy of Marion entered an appearance for Miskel.

St. Clair County associate judge Randall Kelley exercised jurisdiction over a suit against builders of the Keystone Pipeline on the basis of bad information, according to defendant Erb Equipment Company. 

On May 25, Erb Equipment asked Kelley to reconsider an order he signed in April, denying a motion to transfer the suit to Bond County. 

Donald Ohl of Edwardsville quoted from Kelley’s order that Erb Equipment maintains a large office in St. Clair County near the courthouse. 

“The erroneous fact that the defendant, Erb Equipment Company of Illinois, Inc., is located in St. Clair County was cited by this court as reasoning of why this case should not be transferred to Bond County,” Ohl wrote. 

He attached an affidavit of Erb Equipment’s general manager, Trent Daubs, giving an address at 1017 East Chain of Rock Road in Mitchell. 

Mitchell is in Madison County, Ohl wrote. 

Grey Chatham of Belleville filed the suit last year for Louise Downen of Bond County, claiming the pipeline project damaged her farm. 

Downen seeks damages from Canadian developer TransCanada, Sheehan Pipeline of Oklahoma and Erb Equipment. 

She claims her land yields a reduced crop, her pond holds no water, and rocks and debris prevent tilling. 

Chatham practices in Belleville with Charles Baricevic, currently running for Congress on the Democrat ticket. 

Baricevic said when his campaign began that he supported completion of the Keystone Pipeline.

Aren't our state legislators required to pass a balanced budget every year? Yes, they are. Do they? No, they don't.

“The wording in the Illinois Constitution seems clear,” writes Hilary Gowins in a recent post at illinoispolicy.org. “But for more than a decade, Illinois lawmakers have used borrowing and budget gimmicks to pass unbalanced budgets.”

Just last week, Democratic legislators – including Metro East money mismanagers Dan Beiser, Jerry Costello, Jay Hoffman and Eddie Lee Jackson – passed a budget that spends $7 billion more than the state is projected to take in.

“How can politicians continue to propose unbalanced budgets?” Gowins asks. “Simple: Illinois’ constitutional requirement for a balanced budget allows lawmakers to push off any budget shortfall into the future.”

Buy now, pay later? Something like that – only the due date keeps getting pushed back, and the debt keeps growing.

Gowins cites a couple of measures that have been proposed to address this profligacy.

“House Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment 47 would strengthen the Illinois Constitution’s balanced-budget requirement, giving teeth to the current balanced-budget requirement by requiring that spending can’t exceed revenue and prohibiting the use of budget gimmicks,” she notes.

“The governor has proposed passing the Unbalanced Budget Response Act, which would temporarily allow the governor to shift funds and reduce spending to balance the state’s budget.”

Whatever the merits of these proposals, neither addresses the real problem.

“None of this would be necessary,” Gowins affirms, “if Illinois politicians would do their job and spend within the state’s means.”

That won’t happen as long as we refuse to identify the real problem, and keep accepting band-aid solutions that merely delay the day of reckoning, and pretend that we don't know what the obvious solution is.

If we want a balanced budget, we have to elect honest politicians. To do that, we have to be honest, thoughtful voters.

BELLEVILLE — A man is suing Auffenberg Ford Inc., a car dealership, alleging failure to warn and failure to maintain its property in a reasonably safe condition.

Lester Byrd filed a complaint on May 16 in St. Clair County Circuit Court against Auffenberg Ford Inc. in a slip-and-fall case.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that on May 16, 2014, he was a customer at the defendant's property when he slipped and fell on a wet floor. The accident caused him to suffer serious and permanent injuries, including but not limited to a sprained right ankle, acute pain, aching and burning, difficulty in walking, disability, loss of earnings, and past and future medical expenses, the suit says. The plaintiff holds Auffenberg Ford Inc. responsible because the defendant allegedly failed to warn him of the wet and slippery floor and failed to keep the floors safe for persons invited upon their property.

The plaintiff requests a trial by jury and seeks judgment against defendant in an amount to exceed $50,000 and costs of this suit. He is represented by Michael L. McGlynn of McGlynn & McGlynn in Belleville.

St. Clair County Circuit Court case number 16L264

BELLEVILLE — A consumer has filed a class-action lawsuit against Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., a retail store chain operator, citing negligence and alleging that insufficient measures were taken to prevent injuries.

Joseph E. Stell filed a complaint on May 17, in St. Clair County Circuit Court against Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. alleging that the retail store chain operator allegedly failed to exercise ordinary care in maintaining the automatic door at its West Highway 50 in O'Fallon branch.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that their automatic closing exit door closed while he was exiting, causing him to sustain severe and permanent injuries, both externally and internally. The plaintiff holds Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. responsible because the defendant allegedly failed to maintain, operate and/or repair its automatic closing door and negligently failed to provide a safe means of ingress and egress to the public.

The plaintiff requests a trial by jury and seeks judgment against defendant in the amount exceeding $50,000, plus costs of this action. He is represented by Dennis M. Field of Strellis & Field Chartered in Waterloo.

Cook County Circuit Court Case number 16L268

BELLEVILLE — A customer is suing Lowe's Home Center LLC, a home improvement store, citing alleged failure to warn and claiming that insufficient measures were taken to prevent injuries.

Lester Byrd filed a complaint on May 16 in St. Clair County Circuit Court against Lowe's Home Center LLC, alleging that the home improvement store allegedly failed to properly maintain its property in a reasonably safe condition.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that on May 26, 2014, while he was a customer at defendant's store in Belleville, he slipped and fell on a slick wet floor causing him to sustain serious and permanent injuries. He suffered damages including pain and suffering, disability, loss of earnings, loss of enjoyment in life and past and future medical expenses, the suit claims. The plaintiff holds Lowe's Home Center LLC responsible because the defendant allegedly failed to warn him of the wet and slippery floor and failed to keep the floors reasonably safe for invited persons upon their property.

The plaintiff requests a trial by jury and seeks judgment against defendant for a sum that will fairly and adequately compensate him in an amount exceeding $50,000, plus costs of this action. He is represented by Michael L. McGlynn of McGlynn & McGlynn in Belleville.

St. Clair County Circuit Court case number 16L263

EDWARDSVILLE — A woman is suing Bi-state Development, a bus transit provider, claiming negligence led to a traffic collision.

Alexandra D. Gilbert filed a complaint on May 24 in Madison County Circuit Court against Bi-state Development, alleging that the bus transit provider allegedly failed to train its employee to properly operate its vehicle.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that on Dec. 6, while she was lawfully driving her vehicle heading southbound on 20th Street in Granite City, she was struck by the defendant's bus operated by its employee Mechelle Fochtmann, causing the plaintiff to suffer serious and permanent injuries, property damage, towing, storage and car rental expenses and past and future medical expenses. The plaintiff holds Bi-state Development responsible because the defendant's driver allegedly disobeyed the red light signal at the corner of 19th and 20th streets, failed to keep careful lookout, failed to yield right of way and operated the vehicle at an excessive speed.

The plaintiff requests a trial by jury and seeks judgment against defendant in an amount in excess of $50,000. She is represented by Thomas G. Kemper of Law Office of Thomas G. Kemper in Granite City.

Madison County Circuit Court Case number 16L717

BELLEVILLE — A driver is suing another motorist, alleging that negligence led to a rear-end collision.

Kirk Messinger filed a complaint on May 16 in St. Clair County Circuit Court against Tina Rutledge, alleging that the defendant failed to maintain proper control of her vehicle.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that on Nov. 20, while he was operating a motor vehicle in a southerly direction in the intersection of North Illinois Street and Rosewood Drive in Swansea, he was rear-ended by the defendant's vehicle, causing him to suffer extensive injuries to his head, body and limbs, both internally and externally. The plaintiff holds Tina Rutledge responsible because the defendant allegedly failed to timely apply brakes, failed to keep proper lookout, operated the vehicle at an excessive rate of speed and followed his vehicle more closely than was reasonable and proper.

The plaintiff requests a trial by jury and seeks judgment against the defendant in an amount exceeding $50,000, plus costs of this action. He is represented by John H. Hustava of John H. Hustava PC in Collinsville.

St. Clair County Circuit Court case number 16L267

BELLEVILLE — A man is suing USAA Insurance, citing alleged breach of contract.

Fabian Hobbs filed a complaint on May 18 in St. Clair County Circuit Court against USAA Insurance alleging that the insurance firm denied the plaintiff's claim.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that, on March 29, arbitrators said he is due $295,000 stemming from a 2009 automobile crash. He holds USAA Insurance responsible because the defendant allegedly refused to pay plaintiff the award from the case and violated the terms of the insurance plan policy.

The plaintiff seeks judgment against the defendant, an order to pay the arbitration award, attorney's fees of 25 percent of the amount due, court costs and any further relief as this court sees fit. He is represented by James R. Williams of Williams, Caponi & Associates, P.C. in Belleville.

St. Clair County Circuit Court case number 16L270

EAST ST. LOUIS — A woman is suing Sanofi S.A., Aventis Pharma S.A., Sanofi US Services Inc. and Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC, pharmaceutical companies, citing alleged design defect, negligence, product liability and insufficient measures taken to prevent injuries.

Mary Renee Chase filed a complaint on May 27 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois against the defendants, alleging that they failed to provide a listing of potential harmful effects of their product on its label.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that, between January 2013 and February 2013, she was diagnosed with permanent alopecia as a result of undergoing chemotherapy with Taxotere. The plaintiff holds Sanofi S.A., Aventis Pharma S.A., Sanofi US Services Inc. and Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC responsible because the defendants allegedly failed to inform or disclose to their consumers the potential harm Taxotere can inflict.

The plaintiff requests a trial by jury and seeks general damages, all medical expenses, punitive and exemplary damages, interest, restitution, disgorgement of profits, court costs and any further relief as this court sees fit. She is represented by Trent B. Miracle of Simmons Hanly Conroy in Alton and Timothy J. Becker, Michael K. Johnson and Peter C. Snowdon of Johnson Becker, PLLC in Minneapolis.

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois case number 3:16-cv-00588-SMY-PMF

EDWARDSVILLE — A man is suing Phillips 66 Company, Phillips 66 Partners Holdings LLC, Phillips 66 Partners LP, Phillips 66 Carrier LLC, Phillips 66 Pipeline LLC, Buckeye Partners L.P., Buckeye Pipe Line Services Company, Buckeye Terminals LLC, Cenovus Energy US LLC, Hartford Wood River Terminal LLC and HWRD Oil Company LLC, alleging negligence and insufficient measures taken to prevent injuries.

Brent Bauer filed a complaint on May 27 in Madison County Circuit Court against the defendants alleging that they failed to properly dispose of toxic wastes from their facilities.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that, between May 29, 2014 and August 8,, 2014, he sustained damages to his property resulting its value being greatly depreciated. The plaintiff holds the defendants responsible because they allegedly failed to properly process, refine, store and release toxic chemicals and other by-products, resulting in contamination of his property.

The plaintiff requests a trial by jury and seeks compensatory damages in excess of $50,000, interest, court costs, equitable and injunctive relief, and any further relief as this court sees fit. He is represented by R. Seth Crompton and Eric D. Holland of Holland Law Firm in St. Louis.

Madison County Circuit Court case number 2016L000728