DLA Piper Notches $45M Win in Maryland Landfill Fight
In a dispute going back nearly 30 years, the Harford County in Maryland was hit with a verdict of more than $45 million for its successful efforts to block construction of a rubble-fill project the county originally asked for.
April 18, 2018 at 10:09 AM
3 minute read
Ruling in a dispute that began nearly 30 years ago, a Maryland jury on Tuesday awarded more than $42 million to the would-be operators of a construction landfill who were blocked from using property bought for the project by Harford County officials.
The verdict is a win for DLA Piper, which relied on an unconstitutional “taking” claim under the state Constitution. The jury award included more than $30 million for the value of the 62-acre property and $15 million in prejudgment interest, said DLA Piper partner Brett Ingerman.
According to Ingerman and the complaint, the county initially approached Maryland Reclamation Associates Inc. in 1989 about opening a rubble fill, and the company found an ideal candidate at an old mined-out gravel pit.
“The county put it on their solid waste plan, approved the site plan, then our client bought the property,” Ingerman said.
“Then a new county executive came in, and he got elected running on a platform of never allowing a rubble-fill on that property,” Ingerman added.
The county passed a series of zoning laws to delay MRA's efforts to get its permits from the Maryland Department of the Environment, he said. “By the time my clients got their permit, the zoning had been changed to make it impossible to put the rubble-fill in.”
Ingerman said MRA President Richard Schafer spent years in litigation with the county, including multiple trips to Maryland Court of Appeals, which upheld the county's zoning decisions.
In 2013, MRA filed an inverse condemnation action in Harford County Circuit Court, arguing the county had rendered the property worthless through its “systematic, 20-year legislative assault.”
During a two-week trial before retired Baltimore City Circuit Judge John Howard, Ingerman and his DAL Piper co-counsel, Ellen Dew, Rachel Kessler and Nicole Kozlowski and Bob Cawood of Annapolis' Cawood & Cawood argued that MRA should receive the $30.8 million-plus value the property appraised for in 2010, plus prejudgment interest of 6 percent.
The county's team, led by Jefferson Blomquist of Baltimore's Funk & Bolton, included firm associates Justin Aronson and Elliott Hooper.
Blomquist said there will be an appeal and referred any questions to the county.
Tuesday morning, after a total of about three-and-a-half-hours, the jury found that the county's actions constituted a “regulatory taking” and awarded nearly $45.5 million.
In conversation with jurors afterward, Ingerwood said there was a general consensus: “Our client got screwed. That's what everyone said.
“The reason they were comfortable awarding that amount of money is because Rick Schafer has been fighting the county for 30 years,” he added.
Ingerman said he's resigned to an appeal. “But I will say this: If the Harford County Council had a shred of integrity, they'd pay the judgment,” he added.
Harford County spokeswoman Cindy Mumby said via email that there are “numerous appealable issues which the county intends to fully pursue at the appellate level. This continues to be active litigation which we cannot comment on further. “
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'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute read'Unlawful Release'?: Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction in NASCAR Antitrust Lawsuit
3 minute read'Almost Impossible'?: Squire Challenge to Sanctions Spotlights Difficulty of Getting Off Administration's List
4 minute readDC Judge Rules Russia Not Immune in Ukrainian Arbitration Award Dispute
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1De-Mystifying the Ethics of the Attorney Transition Process, Part 1
- 2Alex Spiro Accuses Prosecutors of 'Unethical' Comments in Adams' Bribery Case
- 3Cannabis Took a Hit on Red Wednesday, but Hope Is On the Way
- 4Ben Brafman Defending Celebrity Rabbi in Lawsuit by Miami Hotel
- 5People in the News—Dec. 23, 2024—Barley Snyder, Marshall Dennehey
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