Lawsuit Accuses MDC of Collecting Unlawful Water Surcharges
A prospective class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of residents in four communities who claim they were wrongly billed a surcharge for their water usage.
March 07, 2018 at 12:22 PM
3 minute read
A prospective class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of three Glastonbury residents who allege the Metropolitan District Commission unlawfully charged them a surcharge totaling more than $1,000 each over a nine-year period.
The lawsuit—filed Tuesday in Hartford Superior Court—comes four days after the Connecticut Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling finding the charges from 2006-2014 were not lawful.
The lawsuit claims the MDC wrongfully charged water customers in East Granby, Farmington, Glastonbury and South Windsor a nonmember town water surcharge. The MDC supplies water and sewer services to the eight member towns. The four nonmember towns are provided water service, but not sewer service.
Craig Raabe, attorney for plaintiffs William and Laurie Paetzold, and Andrew Pinkowski, said Wednesday that about 9,000 businesses, residents and town facilities could be part of the class.
“Not everyone in those towns are part of the class action, only those who have city water,” said Raabe, a partner with Izard, Kindall & Raabe in West Hartford. While the total suit could be worth several million of dollars, Raabe said he will not know the amount until discovery.
In her May 2016 ruling, Hartford Superior Court Judge Susan Peck said the surcharges were illegal, and anyone who paid them is entitled to damages.
“There is no question that if the surcharges are unlawful, then the plaintiff can demonstrate damages for the years the surcharges were imposed,” Peck wrote.
The annual surcharges for the plaintiffs varied during the nine years in question and went from a low of $41.40 in 2006 to a high of $423 in 2013. The surcharge was $158.10 in 2012 and $198.96 in 2014. It's not clear why there was a spike in 2013.
Neither MDC counsel R. Bartley Halloran or MDC Chief Executive Officer Scott Jellison could be reached for comment Wednesday.
In October 2014, a state law took effect governing the surcharges going forward. That law states that charges to nonmember communities must be consistent with member communities. Member communities during the nine-year period in question did not have a surcharge fee.
The lawsuit cites three counts: breach of contract, breach of good faith and fair dealing, and unjust enrichment.
Assisting Raabe in the case are colleagues Robert Izard and Mark Kindall.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
From 'Confusing Labyrinth' to Speeding 'Roller Coaster': Uncertainty Reigns in Title IX as Litigators Await Second Trump Admin
6 minute read
Federal Judge Weighs In on School's Discipline for 'Explicitly Copying AI-Generated Text' on Project
When Police Destroy Property, Is It a 'Taking'? Maybe So, Say Sotomayor, Gorsuch
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
