Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout60-97 RESOLUTIONSCANNED RESOLUTION NO. 60 el A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SETTLEMENT OF RUNNELS VS. CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, CIV 96-160 FOR THE AMOUNT OF $7,805.60. . BE IT RESOLVED BY TIM, CITY COI]NCIL OF TIIE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section l. That the City Council hereby agrees to settle the case of Runnels vs. City of Fayeffeville, Arkansas, for the amount of $7,805.60. , . , MCSEB AND (t ,t I 4 ..? ( , t: f.+tl I .* 't:' 1,"/ ":t..8r lo APPROVED this /?*A day of J c-n €-1997 . APPROVED By Hanna, Mayor By Traci * A ) I o oe .| IN THE CIRCUIT COI'RT OF WASHINGTON COI'MTY, ARKANSAS -.:^ B ;_Er i; c,r1 > =c)frl:D=3; s #* a3+ur= FO\a- VTNCEMT BRIAIV RI,]NNELS and BONNIE R. RT]NNELS, Husband and Wife PI,ATIMTFFS VS No. erv e6-. JUtl CITY OF FAYETTEVTLLE DEFEIIDA}TTT EOMPI,AIIIT Come now t,he plaintiffs, Vincent, Brian Runnels and Bonnie R. Runnels, and for their cause of acEion against. the defendanE, City of Fayetteville, sEaLe and allege as follows: (1) That t.he plaintiffs are the owners of certain real property situaE,ed in Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, more particularly described as follows: ParE of the South Half (S]-/2) of E,he SouEhwest euarter(SWL/ ) of Sect.ion Thirty-One (3t1 , Township SevenE,een(L7) Nort.h, Range Tnenty-Nine (29) West, and being moreparticularly described as follows, to-wit: From thesouthwest (sw) corner of said section Thirty-one (31), rrrn North 89 degrees 58'04" East 554.62 feet to theNort.hwest (Nw) Corner of Crossroads EasE Subdivision; t,hence along t,he NorE,h boundary of said subdivision South 88 degrees 08'00'r East 338.74 feet to the poinE ofbeginning; thence Nort.h 02 degrees 36'Ol-" West 269.97feet. Eo a found iron pin; t,hence NorE.h 01 degrees 42118,'$lest 222.54 feets,' thence North 04 degrees 45'44!r EasE247.61 feet; t.hence North 21 degrees O2ILLI West 304.2Lfeet, to a stone; t,hence South 89 degres 3OrO4,' East6L6.87 feet; thence South 0Z degrees 27,44" West 425.66feet to a found iron pin; Ehence Nort.h 89 degrees 37t34nWest 128.80 feet; thence South 06 degrees 00'OO" West607.25 feeE to t.he NorE.h boundary of Crossroads EastSubdivision; t,hence Nort,h 88 degrees 08'OO'r WesE 244.37feet along said NorE.h boundary Eo the point ofbeginning, and conEaining 8.98 acres, more or 1ess, and o Page 2 subjecE. Eo an easement for ingress and egress as shown on t,he plat of Crossroads East Subdivision filed in Book7, Page LO7, Washington County, Arkansas. The ingress/egress roadway easement along the South sideof properEy as shown on plat. of suryey daEed October 13, 1988, €rs being the same as a grant. of easement, dated OcEober 4, 1983, filed for record October 8, 1983, in Book LO92 at Page 477 f rom Carlos D. Treat and ilanet,t,eA. Treat,, husband and wife, Eo Vincent, Brian Runnels and Bonnie R. Runnels, husband and wife. (21 That, in r,he faII 0f 1995, the plaintiffs set, back a gaEe and fence from their souEhernmosts boundary line in an attempt to faciliEafe the defendant in consEnrct,ing a new roadway in close proximity Eo plaintiffs' southernmost, boundary line. (3) That t,he defendant, in Ehe course of const,rucEion of the roadway, crossed over plaint,iffs' boundary line in such a way as to remove t,he level and even grade of t,he land along plaintiffs' southernmosE boundary line result,ing in a steep slope causing erosion and prevenEing plaintiffs from plant,ing ground cover. Furt.hermore, the defendant, removed from plainEiffs' Iand valuable Eop soil which could be used by plaintiffs for planting and growing on plaintiffs' properEy. (4) That. in order Eo replace t.he Eop soil and even grade of plaint.if f s' properE.y, it, will be necessary t.o construcE a reEaining wa11 for support at a cost Eo plaintiffs of $5,000.00. oi, a o o Page 3 (5) That t,he defendant, in constructing the above- mentioned roadway, removed a large and old acorn t.ree from the southwest. corner of plaintiffs' property, thereby damaging plaint,iffs in an amounE equal tso Ehe value of t.he t,ree which was wrongfully removed by defendant,. (6) That the defendant,, in consEruct.ing the above- mentioned roadway, increased Ehe grade of a roadway entering plainEiffs' pasture at, the southeasE corner of plaintiffs' property. The steep grade created by t,he defendanE now washes with any amounE of rain, and unless covered with concrete or a hard bed mat,erial, the plaintiffs will have difficulty enEering the pasEure Ehrough said gate in anyt,hing buE ideal weather conditions. (7) That, Ehe cost of paving the new ent,ranceway to pI-aintsiffs' pasture will be approximately $500.00. (8) That the trespass and resultant, damage to plainEif f s' property was not in good f aiE,h inasmuch as t,he plaintiffs' souEhernmosE, boundary line was and is clearly marked. (9) That the plaint,iffs should have judgrment against, the defendant for damages as st,at.ed hereinabove, as weII as costs and aEtorneyr s fees in pursuing t.his cause of act,ion. WHEREFORE, premises considered, the plaint.iffs herein v/ o o.7 I Page 4 pray for judgment against, the defendant in the sum of $5,500.00, represent,ing t,he cost, of consEnrctiOn of a retaining waII or similar st.ructure and t,he costs of a ramp into plaint,iffs' pasture; for judgmenE against the defendant. in an amounE, three t,imes the value of plaintiffs' tree which was cuE and removed by defendant; for plaintiffs' cost,s and reasonable attorney's fees; and for any and all furEher relief to which plaint,iffs may prove Ehemselves entit.Ied. VINCENT BRIAIiI RI]NNELS and BONNIE R. RI,NNELS, Husband andWife, Plaintiffs t TIS E. HOGUE,#800 6LAttorney aE Law 2L5 W. Meadow SL. P.O. Box 3130Fayetteville, AR 72702-3L30 50L /qq2-7736 ATTORNEY FOR PLATNTTFFS o o \. a t. I 0 R08 ii!--- E I AP it l a IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, ARKANSAS VINCENT BRIAN RUNNEIS and BONNIE R. RUNNEIS, Husband and Wife,PLAINTIFFS vs.CIv 9GI6O '!(.og) D.tEJCITY OF FAYETTEVILLE DEFENDANT -r\ \),\ ANSWER COMES now the Defendant City of Fayetteville and files this its Answer I' C) Complaint: o =l. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in parafaph I of the Complaint and accordingly those allegations are denied. 2. Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 2 of the Complaint and affirmatively states that the Plaintiff at the request of the City removed a gate and fence from the City's existing right-of-way in order for the City to construct a City street and that the Plaintiff has now placed a gate and fence ouside of the City right-of-way. 3. Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 3 of the Complaint. 4. Defendant denies the allegation contained in paragraph 4 of the Complaint. 5. Def'endant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 5 of the Complaint. 6. Defendant admis the grade of the roadway was increased but, denies the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 6 of the Complaint and afFtrmatively states that it was at all times the intent of the City to reasonably pave a roadway to the Plaintiffs southeast gate but has been prevented from doing so as a result of this lawsuit. 7. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 7 of the Complaint. 8. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 8 of the Complaint. r,-l : t toffl€ntifFJ ,-- J() O 2-- o 9. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 9 of PlaintifPs Complaint and specifically denies any statutory or contractual right of the Plaintiff to attorney fees. 10. The Defendant denies each and every material claim of the Complaint not specifically admitted herein. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE l. The Plaintiff is precluded from obtaining an award of damages against the City of Fayetteville pursuant to the City's immunity from liability for damages set forth in A.C.A.$21-9- 301. WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Defendant City of Fayetteville prays that the damages prayed for be denied, and that Plaintiffs Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARI(ANSAS, Defendant. 138 Attorney 113 'W. Mountain Fayetteville, AR 72701 (501)575-83 13 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jerry E. Rose, hereby ceftify that on thisWday of Apo 1996, I have of the above a a <- EJ IL caused to be deposited in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid a true and correct copy and foregoing Answer to: Mr. Curtis E. Hogue P.O. Box 3130 Fayetteville, AR 72702-3 130 *, J E. Rose