ALC-Claims Review/Litigation Reports Oversight (1:30PM – 3:30PM)

I called this meeting to order. Thank everyone for coming today. We're going to get Right into the we have no opening remarks by the co chair so we will Sturch run into the. I don't see of litigations oversight reports by agencies. Members agenda item C. one through C. five copies a litigation reporter settlements submitted by agencies we invite agencies to come to the table to present them we start off with C. one et the University of Arkansas for medical sciences if you're here. You may come to the table. If you would please identify yourself for the record before you begin. Good afternoon my name is Mindy Pipkin I'm an associate general counsel with the University of Arkansas System steps versus the University of Arkansas for medical sciences is the discrimination claim Mr steps that filed the lawsuit the Eastern District of Arkansas on November ninth two thousand twenty one alleging both race discrimination as well as retaliation after he was terminated from his residency program an amended complaint was filed on February twenty fourth two thousand twenty two to name the board of trustees for the university of Arkansas system as well as Dr Thomas holds both in his individual and official capacities counsel has filed a motion to dismiss the claims against both parties on April thirteenth two thousand twenty two and currently the motion is still pending before the court. With that I'll take any questions. Or a question for members. Okay I see no will see no questions. Okay we'll consider this review thank you thank you. Which one okay a second vote I do need a motion to consider that reviewed with someone like a motion and a second I have a second. Opens. Motion carries. C. two department of labor licensing. If you would state your name and who you're with police and you're welcome per se thank you of miles Morgan associate general counsel to part of labor and licensing we have a two two items item a director of labor versus joint forces K. nine group this is a a wage claim its use an employee at the join forces canine she canceled her health insurance through payroll while while she was employed there the deductions were continued for about three months and just kind of an oversight we reach out the employer with some negotiations but willfully filed suits the deductions hold around one thousand six hundred seventy six dollars And it is set for hearing on September thirteenth in solemn springs District Court. And that's item a item B. Mr chairman it's a wage claim it again two of employees for Dan and Serra rice they did business as a tree service they refused to pay wages owed for the hours that the to wage claimants of performance at work and I want claim is for one thousand one hundred fifty one dollars and fifty cents the other claims for one thousand eight hundred twenty four dollars we filed a motion or a proposed order for default judgment in Carroll County District Court that was mailed to the District Court August sixteenth assuming that if that's granted we will look into collection efforts read a garnishment and rid of execution possibly to try to retain the the wages that are owed. And I'll be happy to take any questions. Or any questions members. Seeing none do I have a motion review. I have a motion and a second. Second all in favor say aye opposed no. Motion carries thank you Sir thank you Mr. C. three university of Arkansas system. Please state your name again for the record yes many fifth can associate general counsel for the university of Arkansas system agenda item a is Armstrong versus the board of trustees Angela Armstrong was employed at the university of Arkansas at little rock as she filed a title seven claim on November twelfth two thousand twenty one alleging sexual harassment retaliation an amended complaint was filed in March to identify the party is the board of trustees of the university of Arkansas system I counsel filed an answer in March of two thousand and twenty two and currently the parties in the beginning stages of discovery. With that I'll take any questions. Members are there any questions. Seeing none I have a motion to review I have a motion and second. Second. All in favor say aye opposed no. Motion carries thank you. Item number B. is also a lawsuit against the University of Arkansas at little rock the University of Arkansas at little rock alumni association there was an amended complaint to name the board of trustees in place of those at two parties the court recently dismissed the case on August fifth two thousand and twenty two and the nature of the claim was a disability disability discrimination claim in violation of the American with disabilities act with that I'll take any questions. Members are there any questions. All right put your but they're not get you know. Mr. Dismiss the action. Yes senator flowers the court entered an order dismissal on August fifth the two thousand twenty two so just a couple weeks ago. So she has or the whoever it is has thirty days to appeal. The order I believe with was without prejudice so I'm not sure how the plaintiff's counsel will proceed with the with that claim at this point in time. But generally there's thirty days after the date of the order there's typically thirty il I apologize there's typically thirty days to file permit a order with prejudice but this order was without prejudice. And so for that reason but it wouldn't be final order for an appeal you would not be that is correct what are your expectations if any. I do not have any expectations at this point I haven't spoken with the plaintiff's counsel about the dismissal and so I do not I do not have any. So the order is dismissed with out prejudice that is correct so they can refile. If the plaintiff chooses yes. Otherwise. If there I mean what's the timeline wow. When will can we reasonably expect if the plaintiff does nothing that this case is concluded. Is there a statute of limitations for bringing the case again. There is a statute of limitations but I would have to go back and look at what the statute of limitations is on a disability discrimination claim I am College as it just don't know the answer at this point in time. So you can't really tell us anything else until you hear something huh that is correct yes ma'am thank you Mr I move for review. All right any other questions seeing none we have a motion to review of the second. I have a second okay the near one all right all those of favour say aye. You those are a motion carries. All right C. for Arkansas rehabilitation services. This is a settlement. If you would please state your name and who you're with please Sir thank you Mister chair Charles live for general counsel for Arkansas rehabilitation services. And this is marina Jackson with the Arkansas attorney general's office thank you. All right you're welcome per se. Okay thank you Sir as you said this is a settlement of a charge that was pending before the equal employment opportunity commission we at rehabilitation services at an employee now former employee who filed a charge that alleged retaliation and discrimination on the basis of race and disability this employee had been demoted from an area manager position to a counselor position after that she resigned we started an investigation after we were given this charge into those allegations and we determined I determined that of settlement through mediation would be the best course of action to try and resolve the claims the former employee was represented by counsel and she agreed through our attorney to mediate and that mediation was successful all claims that were or could have been raised in connection with the EOC charge will be dismissed as a result of the settlement and Ayres's nor the state is not admitting liability of any kind we deny the allegations and continue to do so the settlement is fifty five thousand dollars which is one year's salary approximately in the area manager position prior to the demotion that was presented to the department of finance and administration DFA approve the settlement to move forward to this subcommittee and that's and the attachments for this agenda item the DFA letter and so the next step is to give you all this briefing and Clause questions at this time if there are any thank. Yes Senator Hammer is recognized thank you Mr what area did she represent. I don't quote me on the number I think by the agency number this would be region eight but it was the Jonesborough base will search the area. And follow up Mr you're recognized thank you. As far as her record is concerned if she was to be re hired or somebody has to look at hiring her would there be anything that would be of a derogatory nature on her record that would prevent her from being hired either in another place of state employment or public sector. So thank you for the question senator as a result of the settlement she would get if she applies again for state employment we get a neutral reference from rehabilitation services you cannot reapply for position within our business there's number she is free to apply for other state employment and if someone inquires and they would get individual reference or thank you thank Mr. Are there any other questions members. All right thank you but please. Senator flowers recognized so when is the settlement gonna be. Submitted to a court for an order. thank you senator since this was mediated through the EOC and the EOC supply the mediator what we'll do is take the settlement after review today and that's a document between the agency and the claim it and then that will be combined with the documents that the mediator provides so the EEOC will extinguish the charge it didn't get to court and it won't it and so the of C. Wendell that. Okay in. Because I was wondering why do you. So it never was a case file in court. No this item in a voice that that's okay thank you move for review. All right any other questions. Senate I do need a motion on this one for the this report well for settlement. So you want to add settlement to that motion. Okay we'll get you up there all right Europe. Just just say it will get it. Okay thank you do I have a second I have a second all right all those of favour say aye. Opposed. Motion carries or so thank you. All right Adam C. five of. Contractors licensing board. Please state your name and who you're with for the records are. Thank you Sir Greg grow an administrator of the Arkansas contractors licensing board. You're recognized. Thank you Sir we have to matters litigation where where the plaintiff of the first one of Arkansas residents a kind of yours Committee verses Erin Morrissey for an unpaid civil penalty we have filed suit to try to collect the unpaid civil penalty we have not been successful in getting service so far we have hired a process server hope to get him service so far he has moved from the address we had former thought we had a good address we would have sued that he apparently has thank you to that place so we have without engine so we still have another little bit of time we'll have to get an extension of time the service or dismiss if we don't get him served. That's all person yes any questions I have a question your budget but. Sir Clark you're recognized. So are you going to serve him by publication is are requested for the court to serve him by publication we have that's a good question senator we traditionally don't because it's usually a waste of money publication to try to get on my way because it's so hard to court set aside so easy the quartet was they set those aside for use if you don't dot any higher I don't like the publication service we we will look into that and then thank you for bringing that to my attention that but the we have a lot of success collecting money for it but we serve that way people we actually get service on and have communication with were pretty successful in getting them to to pay but we certainly can look into non trying to serve him by publication you senator. What was he at a licensed contractor he was not he was an unlicensed contractor he took money to build a fence for a couple in Little Rock in a partial job basically everything he had he had done had to be torn out and re in the most material could not even be re used by when I retired when I hired someone proper to do the job for the. Contractor's license and the board hired their own attorney or are they represent by the AG's office we have our own in house counsel. Well I guess you're. All council should know how to. Get service yes yes you senator we and publication is. Hello Allen yes so low that yes ma'am I will bring that back I'm sure she's always thought of that I'm she's busy today getting ready for for hearings were having this week so I'm over here doing this so but I will I'm sure she's I thought of that I had discussed it with her yeah we thought we had a good address on him when we serve them turns out he had the process server hasn't given up yet the process service and they've got some lead to try to find and select I haven't given up yet. Thank you Mr. Senator Hammer. Thank you want to clarify some you just said make sure don't misunderstand would you say about the course not liking what kind of publication would you say I probably overstepped my bounds and I apologize for that Senator I just send someone else in several cases of it comes through the court system when I when you serve them by publication I've seen the courts set those aside much more off those default judgements aside much more often than it upon any other kind of default judgment I'm not saying it's not possible it's not what I'm saying that thank you they also did amend the rules recently to make it a little more yes to do by publication and when you say publication you to about like a legal notification in the newspaper yes some okay that because it's not red because it's not seen is that some of the history goes with that some of the there's a calendar quarter looking for reasons set those aside especially if someone that shows back up you know is that I didn't know about this I didn't read it whatever expenses might I'm I'm probably should bottle up that the no I'm glad you did for other reasons thank you I appreciate it thank you Mr. Any other questions. Senator flowers you're recognized. Of this. Misquote you're not an attorney are you I am I don't practice I came along I since current but I haven't really practicing years of I was the attorney for the board a long time ago but I've been the administrator the board since the two thousand eight so what I don't think that the court set it aside because somebody didn't read it. I think it's more that you have to make sure when the court signs the order allowing publication notice that you have exhausted all the things that are required to find the person last known address with the check tax rolls the lady the secretary of state's office to see if you got an address there for voter registration or something like that it has nothing to do with whether a person reads okay I understand completely I really should not object over a Hornet's nest that indicates a lot that's not leaks to misunderstand what the law is yes ma'am I do understand that. Any other questions. I have a motion. We have second of second. All in favor say aye. He opposed motion carries. Number two number two is a as the Arkansas contractors licensing board against west river construction LLC this is one we have got service on they are in default they have been in contact with us we are trying to work out payment arrangements with them we can get a default judgment we would and we're not talking about discounting the amount of money they owe us are going to pay a hundred percent but let them paid out over say six months or something makes more sense than trying to force right there there in. North Carolina South Carolina they have both addresses and so we were trying to work with them to to get it to get paid that we have been contacted by they're turning that they are already in the fall. Is this also known license contract they were actually license at one point they had a whole lot of problems they were building a apartment student apartment complexes not for in the universities but close to the university's and they had a whole lot of problems with paying subcontractors using a license subcontractors in their Middlemore over multiple projects wasn't just one project problem and serve their but they gave up their license about the same time we penalize them several years ago. All right any questions. Seeing none no I have a motion. I have a motion and a second and a second all those in favor say aye. Motion carried thank. All right. Are removed and the out of the. Yes Sir. The my company little bit closer okay some of the US and which all right when the service coming up I believe she knows to do that but we'll tell or. All right miss your rates a table we will begin the claims review portion of the agenda if you state your name and who you're with we will get. My name's Katherine RBM the director the claims commission. All right. Back on here. So we're going to do Russian reissuing one. Okay so we'll go to item one was re issue of warrants and unpaid bills missteps can. Can you give a brief description of the claim. Yes this is Claim number D. one AA Eric Smith and Susan Smith versus the Arkansas department of finance and administration this claim was filed by the shipments requesting re issuance of an outdated warrant in the amount of sixty nine thousand four hundred twenty four dollars payable from the department of finance and administration the ward is still outstanding and no duplicate has been issued the claims commission unanimously allowed the claim and referred for review and placement on an appropriation bill. Service Commission everything to add nicer but I'm happy to take any questions are there any questions from members. Seeing none do I have a motion to approve the Saddam. A motion second motion second all in favor say aye opposed no. Our motion carries this desk. This claim is claim number two two zero seven two five rich apart versus the University of Arkansas for medical sciences this claim was filed on this park against university of Arkansas for underpaid salary in the amount of twenty five thousand nine hundred twelve dollars and eighty cents USMS answered admitting liability due to an administrative error the claims commission allowed the claim and referred for review in placement on an appropriation bill. Sorry does the commission have anything to add to this no Sir but I'm happy to take any questions any questions. Seeing none do I have a motion to approve. I have a motion second second all those of favour say aye. All opposed no motion carries the server. Sorry I'm sorry I missed you get abused their the next claim is claim number D. one C. it's two two one three four two Nucor corporation versus the Arkansas department of finance and administration this claim was filed by Nucor requesting re issuance of an outdated warrant and the amount of three hundred ninety two thousand six hundred and twenty three dollars and twenty nine cents payable from the department of finance and administration Warren is still outstanding no duplicate has been issued the claims commission unanimously allowed the claim and referred for review and placement on appropriation bill. Service Commission everything to add to this yes Sir I'm happy to take any questions any questions. I have a motion a motion seconded the motion second all those of favour say aye. He opposed no. Motion carries. Okay would up to item number two negotiated settlement agreement the staff can can you give a brief description of the claim. This is claim number two one one three five two Greg gas away and lance Gazaway doing business as GM al Gazaway farms versus the Arkansas the Division of correction in its complaint claimant alleged damages in the amount of eighty six thousand eight hundred eighty dollars to cotton crop on a hundred sixty acre field claimant allege that responded Arkansas division of corrections braided soybean crop by use of a groundbreaking application and the chemicals drifted across the property damaging and destroying claimant's cotton crop claimant allege fifty acres of total loss and twenty five acres of damage ATC denied liability and moved to dismiss the claim for failure to state facts upon which relief could be granted ATC argued that the total damage was limited to ten to fifteen acres and that the correct measure of damages would be the market value of the crop at the time of destruction alternatively if the crop was too young to have a market value it was too late to plan again ABC argue that the measure of damages should be the rental value of the land after claimant filed an amended complaint alleging that the rental value of the land was thirty thousand dollars the parties entered into an agreement settling the claim for twenty seven thousand dollars the claims commission approved the settlement agreement and referred the award to the General Assembly for review and placement on an appropriation bill. Service you have anything to add to that Nassar happy take any questions that senator Hammer we we have a question good thing Mr do you know what product it was that they were spring was around up was it die die Kammer do you know what product they were spring I do not know and I don't know if we have any the parties here to ask that but I I don't believe that was in the. Senator believe that's in the report have to dig it out okay. Okay what out just once I get it at some point I'd be curious to know which which product it was that they. They were spring that and I presume it had address factor to it so I'll get with you offline but I'd like to get that for me please yes Sir thank you. You want to say that. So we're gonna give you the name and I'll probably mess it up so I believe it's blue moxie Ozon. State to Marx's As and maybe F. L. U. M. I. O. X. A. Z. I. N.. Yes center Hammer it's on page sixty three. All right any other questions. Sir I need a motion as to the negotiated settlement. I have a motion. All right and I have the second of second all in favor say aye. All opposed no. Motion carries. Of number three awarded claims referred pursuant to Arkansas Code. Nineteen ten dashed to fifteen be. Miss asking please give a brief description of the claim. This is claim number two zero zero one one five James construction group LLC versus the Arkansas department of transportation in Arkansas state highway commission claimant James construction group sought three hundred thirty eight thousand nine hundred forty eight dollars and fifteen cents and damages for the Arkansas from the Arkansas department of transportation allegedly stemming from additional work to address bridge deck concrete cracking on two bridge projects claimant allege that after substantial completion of the projects are not demanded additional work without identifying any contractual specification the claimant's work and violated claimant perform the additional work under protest are not denied liability arguing the claimant was liable for the cost of the additional work following a hearing on this matter the commission enters an order awarding claimant two hundred seventy thousand seventy one dollars and sixty cents which included labor materials equipment and subcontractor costs as well as insurance tax and bond damages in addition the commission also awarded twenty four thousand one hundred and twenty dollars an attorney fees the commission found the claimant had met its burden of proving breach of contract by respondent specifically the commission found based on the testimony that other than the isolated spoiled areas the cracking on the bridge deck was not excessive and that are not should not have demanded claim to do additional work to add a polymer overlay the commission found that this demand violated the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing the commission referred the total award of two hundred ninety four thousand one hundred ninety one dollars and sixty cents to the General Assembly for review approval and placement on an appropriation bill. Service Commission everything that no Sir I'm happy to take any questions that are there any questions. Or a do I have a motion to this of awarded climb. I have a motion seconded a motion the second all in favor say aye opposed no. Motion carries. Adam for the night of the Miss club dismissed claims appeal by the claimant. Mr asking can you give a brief description of this claim. This is claim number D. for a two one zero six so poor Richard gentle versus the Arkansas department of transportation claimant gentle sought an unspecified amount of damages from the Arkansas department of transportation Clinton alleged that he was traveling west on highway sixty nine and turn north onto highway one sixty three this boat trailers we'll an axle allegedly hit a culvert sticking out into the road and turned over on the highway claiming alleged that has axle was bent the boat's motor was broken and the trailer was broken into two pieces as a result of the accident are not moved to dismiss the claim alleging the claimant fell to controls vehicle and remain within the white lines and the claimant fail to state a legally cognizable cause of action in support of its claim are not attached a picture of the intersection limited not respond to our doubts motion the claims commission treated Arnott's motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment because of the attached picture and entered an order dismissing denying and dismissing the claim on April twenty six two thousand twenty one in its order the commission found that are not made a prima facia showing that it was entitled to judgment as a matter of law based on the picture but the claimant fell to demonstrate that there were any issues of genuine issues of material fact precluding summary judgment when it failed to respond after entry of the commission's April twenty sixth order attorney Jennette Wally filed a letter of representation in a request for appeal on June first two thousand twenty one are not subsequently filed a motion to strike the pleading is untimely on June twenty eight two thousand twenty one however the commission did not address miss Wylie's response or Arnott's motion to strike stating that its jurisdiction terminated upon transmission of the claim to the General Assembly miss what we subsequently sent a letter to be a large staff advising that she's no longer able to represent claimant she is accepted employment with the state. Sorry does the commission everything that Nassar happy to take any questions that are there any questions. Do I have a motion as to this claim which was denied or dismissed both claims commission I have a motion. I have a second I have a second. All in favor say aye. All opposed no motion carries. suggestion when you get a brief description of the next following. This is claim number two zero zero three five six Daphne low propers of the Arkansas department of transportation claimants sought unspecified damages associated with injuries to her person and damaged her vehicle claiming alleged that she was driving on how we want to work for city and that you slow down below the speed limit when it began to rain heavily between Haynes and for city she reported that she noticed rights of water and tried to stay on the paved area of the rights however the car begin to slide despite her best efforts as she tried to straighten her car she alleged that is fun to the right and rolled into a ditch on its side are not denied liability and moved to dismiss the claim Clement responded reasserting her arguments that are not was responsible for the damage and stating that the road had yet to be repaired after discovery and a hearing on the matter the claims commission denied and dismissed the claim finding claimant's testimony and evidence to be insufficient to establish liability on the part of our limit appeals. Surbhi do you have anything to add Nassar happy to take any questions that are there any questions. Do I have a motion to of. For this claim. That was denied a motion and second. And all in favor say aye. All opposed no motion carries. This testing would you your description the next like. This is claim number one eight zero three four one yes ma'am. I'm wondering is the chair where are that that any of these people that have a. I guess there are these things are being appealed lease case claims of an appeal this but you haven't asked for the claimant five I just want to know if they are here and now we've just overlooking ma'am are not allowing them an opportunity to come before the body. Yes. This section. Senator what we usually do it members have questions and that person is here that's correct we will allow them to come forward and answer questions with had no questions for anybody yet on the so. Thank you they will have thank their date court. Liver Heatherton FOR. All. far as I know we as far as I know we've never done that right. No I don't think we have because these are already been dismissed claims that I dismiss the. All we're doing is just a farming what the claims commission has. Our. Okay. I can I can check is everybody signed up. I would allege Senator Hester tell you what. Senator flowers certainly you can your product as set out in our mentions committee for the last four years in the what we do is we we. We just here the the the state you know the state a claim and that's on both sides because sometimes the state appeals right if they don't like a decision and so we don't allow either side to make a case here unless a member specifically asked in the in the reason for that in the past we're doing it we we would sometimes being here for days at a time when you know the the request as it members do their homework before and if they have questions they could asking at that point if you ask for once I will out the other side to speak as well. But you can imagine the what we found was no one was ever happy with five minutes aside or fifteen minutes aside or thirty minutes a side so it just it ends up being a day's worth of a committee. So we just decided we would just. Not so the unless a member ask if you ask every time the will ask every time. We don't do signage. They have to ask to I think it's prudent to ask to be here to be able to to present. At. They have asked president if they come. Well they would they would I guess would you like to speak to the can you speak to the. Are we have. All right we do not take oral argument on this this like Senator has percent of the member has a question we ask that question and we move all. So we do not take oral argument that's already been decided. All right where were we. All right so Russell ready for a motion. On this claim on the seat I would be for B.. Two of. What okay the latter dismissed all right a second I have a second all those in favor say aye. All opposed no. Motion carries. Staska you're recognized. The next claim its claim number one eight zero three four one Christopher Martin versus the Arkansas state police in his initial complaint dated October eleventh two thousand seventeen claimants sought three hundred fifty thousand dollars in damages from the Arkansas state police and a straight state trooper for false arrest excessive force false imprisonment in violation of claimant's right to bodily integrity in violation of the US in Arkansas constitution's claim alleged the district trooper shot him with a taser gun while he was running and that he broke his jaw and teeth and suffered a traumatic brain injury as a result of being unable to break his fall when he was tasered concerning the liability of the Arkansas state police claimant contended that ASP fell to prohibit the use of tasers at individuals who are running in accordance with the taser product warning bulletin and standard police practice. On November sixth two thousand seventeen ASP moved to dismiss the claim arguing that the claims commission lacked jurisdiction to hear claims asserting violations of rights under the US constitution and the Arkansas constitution on November second two thousand twenty claimant filed an amended claim asserting further claims under the U. S. in Arkansas constitution's claimant also sought redress for the state towards of malicious prosecution false imprisonment and civil assault and battery in addition claimants are sought damages for pain and suffering mental anguish and humiliation loss of teeth physical injury physical impairment of the John mouth loss of earnings mental health services dental care expenses and attorney's fees and costs on December second two thousand twenty ASP moved to dismiss the claim for failure to state a claim limit did not follow response and on February tenth two thousand twenty one the claims commission enters an order granting a espys motion to dismiss concerning claimant's federal law claims the claims commission held that these claims could be brought brought in federal court and hence the did not have jurisdiction over these claims the claims commission dismissed claimants Arkansas Civil Rights Act claims and malicious prosecution claims for failure to state facts upon which relief can be granted as to claim in state law false imprisonment assault and battery claims the claims commission held that they were time barred on March first two thousand twenty one pursuant to Arkansas rules of civil procedure sixty a claimant move the commission to vacate or set aside its order dismissing the claim to prevent miscarriage of justice Clement argued one the claimant had articulated a meritorious claims in the amended complaint to the claimants counsel did not have internet email computer or phone access from February tenth through February nineteenth of two thousand twenty one three the council was a solo practitioner with a heavy caseload for the council did not have staff to assist him five the council began work on a response to the state's motion with his internet issues were fixed and would be able to finalize a response within the week and six the council had been conducting discovery. On March fourth two thousand twenty one ASP responded to the claimants motion arguing that the facts set forth by council were insufficient to establish a miscarriage of justice S. B. noted that claimants response was due on December sixteenth two thousand twenty for rule six of the Arkansas rules of civil procedure well the for the claims commission entered its order on February tenth twenty twenty one on March fifth twenty twenty one the claims commission denied claimants motion to vacate or set aside the prior order dismissal specifically the commission was unpersuaded the claimant clearly articulated states liability and is amended complaint as to councils other rationales the claims commission found them to be irrelevant to claimant's failure to respond given that the response was due on December sixteenth twenty twenty claiming appeals. Service Commission everything that no Sir I'm happy to take any questions we have any questions Senator Hammer you're recognized. Thank you Mr I'm looking through the paperwork and I page three I just want to clarify this is the case said when the case went to a jury trial circuit court to close the state's evidence the trial judge dismissed all charges because arrest was illegal without probable cause and the court of appeals affirmed the trial court's decision is that correct. I'm looking at page four I'm sorry Page four. Well and I don't I don't have the same booklet in front of you but I do understand that that that the. The federal lawsuit was dismissed this with specific grounds I couldn't speak to it the statement right so this is in regards to the to the federal. To the federal case that. The underlying federal case I care. We were notified I. In June nineteen jun twenty nineteen the claimant advise the claims commission at the federal lawsuit was concluded that was the terminology that was used in so the claims commission claimed and restarted at that point. Okay and I just wanna make sure I'm a minor and so it's the state police is position that the claim should not be paid is that correct. You you have to you have to ask the state police that but I believe that the state police has opposed the granting of this claim the move to dismiss at or thank you they Mr. Yes Sir. And your budget but again. Thank you Mr chairman is cheers is a gentleman a ride that seems to have stood up to speak at it health care is going to acknowledge your allow member of the audience who may have interest in this case to speak if you want to call it done all you do is answer questions we cannot we can ask him a question that is all we can okay let me do that and if you don't mind please Mr all right Sir if you wanna come down take a seat appear and you look to state your name and who you're with. what you get to table an attorney Michael please. All right. I was out all all you all you can do is let us ask you a question answer the question no statements all right yes all incentives Morris Thompson I represent the claim that ballot okay of Senator Hammer thank you thank you Sir it in my interpreting the. Information we have in front of us has a statement that the jury and the judge dismissed all the charges against the individual because the rest was determined to be legal without probable cause there's a wreck is that correct that's correct the criminal charges were dismissed as you said and because there was no problem because the testimony at the trial established that the office admitted that. He. I was sitting in the parking lot looking for my client to go back so that he could then get in by behind them and possibly trail him to establish probable cause but as it was my client pulled it to the parking lot to go shop for the state to be in the city so there was never any basis for the stop in the first place which would have led to the conclusion. Or would it lead to the conclusion that you should never been paged in the first place he never should have been case in the first place okay thank you Mr. Yeah we will Senator Senator flowers do you have a question for this gentleman for someone else. When it when it I'm sorry thank you I'm kind of hard to hearings of okay hello Michael my question it I think it's to the Director of the claims commission okay and maybe to the gentleman of attorney the. My understanding from what was read. In terms of the disposition by the claims commission is that they had no jurisdiction. And it appears to me and answer Yes I may but I would think that the proper venue and jurisdiction would be with the federal court or state court alleging violations of his constitutional rights. Is that directly to me you may I want to know if that first of all if the claims commission it was that was their position I heard you say. Senator flowers yes ma'am on February tenth twenty twenty one and I'm referring to paragraphs seven and eight at the commission's order they found that the nineteen eighty three federal law claims and claims under the Arkansas Civil Rights Act the commission did not have jurisdiction over those. And so Mr Thompson how how how can you overcome jurisdictional. Issue that was decided. In two ways ma'am first of all I'm sorry I thought I turned it off Did you make your response to the claims commission concerning lack of jurisdiction I'm sorry which city did you make your claim to the jury the claims commission of that of the claims commission had jurisdiction yes associate judge yes senator of on two points first of. On the jurisdiction. Yes Is directional question yes that's what I'm about to address yes yes you may get a response. Okay. We're here because the bill I want to know as far as the jurisdiction of the claims commission did you present an argument showing the claims commission had jurisdiction in my motion to strike I did. I I laid out that in addition to those other claims I was also making a point claim against the house of police department Arkansas state police and there's no question about jurisdiction there based on what or well I don't understand why it was brought before the claims commission any of the claims it's because more appropriate to be in a court of law either federal or state court okay because you cannot sue the state and Circuit court in Arkansas courts this state federal court for constitutional right violation no ma'am you cannot sue a state a state is not considered a person under of civil rights under section nineteen eighty three you are so in these officers for a failing to and here to policy so I was so I was so in yes that's as to the officer individually but as far as the state is concerned my of the complaint against the state is that the state had a pattern and practice of arming the state troopers with these dangerous instrumentalities these tasers and did not give them our training I don't believe you all have before you a copy of my spreadsheet which shows that the state of Arkansas are armed three hundred seventy two state troopers and never trains them. On the limitations of these dangerous image and instrumentality is. Three hundred and seventy two thank you for your response. I'm sorry thank you for your response thank you Mr chair. Senator Hammer you have no questions. One. It shall I read through the paperwork if you were stopped as a trooper told him to stop the first time and it not run there would've been no need for the treasure to be used correct. That's not quite true Sir because my client had no idea that the troop was talking to him as he came out at the trial there were other people standing by the front door of the grocery store where my client was going in my class I had no idea the trooper was talking to him. As he approached the front door he told the trooper. Was talking to that the gas milling around. He had no idea that the state trooper head of was keyed in on him. But you don't deny the fact that he ran. Yes that is correct because he'd looked back saw the trooper reaching for a gun what he thought was a gun and he was trying to get out of the week okay he had no idea that the troop was talking to him again Sir because the trooper was parked in the parking lot he turned into the parking lot to park and go shop he had no idea that the state trooper was talking to a okay thank you thank Mr. Mr wait would you like to. Enter checked into this conversation. This call is a sign. Is there anyone here that would like to interject any testimony in this. Hello this chair if I'm. To answer questions. So I just say okay know else yes Sir I just want to clarify what we're seeking we're simply asking the committee to our remand this full full hearing on the merits and so that the case can be present it of slowly to the commission okay all right thank you Sir. All right. Any other questions. Seeing none so I'm gonna ask for this motion do I have a motion as to this claim which was ignited dismissed. Just wanna farm the ruling of this claims commissions I have a motion. I have a motion and a second. Second I have a second our. All in favor say aye. Impose. Motion carries. Thanks or. And your all right reserved. Standstill. Mr skin would you read the next case please. This is case number two one one zero nine one to me trio Tucker versus the Arkansas department of transportation claimant sought unspecified damages for damage to her vehicle which arose when she had a pothole what trying to merge on to I forty eastward months from for city she alleged that her room and we'll cover were damaged and her tire was flattened rendering the vehicle on drivable or not denied liability and moved to dismiss the claim the claims commission entered an order dismissing the claim without prejudice the commission found the claimant did not allege any facts regarding our dots prior knowledge of the possible failure to repaired within a reasonable amount of time in the absence of that evidence the commission how the existence of a possible alone was insufficient to establish liability claiming appeals. Sir did you have anything to add from the commission no Sir but I'm happy to take any questions Senator Hammer sure the clarify did that it was our previous records at the department correct department your place as far as pothole complaints about this particular one. what you have Senator is what we received from the claimant and there is there is no such documentation included or ever presented by the claimant in this matter or in response to the motion to dismiss the it seems like I remember in a previous meeting the does the department have like a hotline number something like that where people can call and report those potholes when they see him out there I believe that there are a number of ways that the motoring public can report potholes but I could not speak to the specifics I think that there is a website option I think there is a telephone option but as to this particular pothole in question that this claim is about you know if there was any previous complaints filed. With the Department as to this with the Department I cannot speak to that answer it but with the Department here Mister senator Hammer I believe there is someone would you like to have a couple yes I would please thank you all right so I'll be brief thank you department here they were yes they are saw. I have a question. Please state your name and who you're with. Well sparks deputy chief counsel of our dot thank you Sir Hammer you're recognized thank you I just clarification is just and I'm maybe this picture this pothole in the road or is it on his on the shoulder do you know. I believe this one was on an. Either an entrance or exit from the ramp from the interstate. Okay so it is in the pathway of the drivers yes okay so do you know if there was do you is there system that people can call report that yes they can they can call they can go on our website and click report a pothole okay and what's your claim on this it was there were there multiple calls on this one you know I do not know. With that have a bearing on say if there was fifty complaints on this one and this was number fifty one that hit it and had the damage done would that be of any value for us as legislators to know that. Well the claimant's responsibility to bring their claim forward is to prove liability and the claimant did not have any proof that are not had prior notice so are not are not didn't bring that response but it's not there burden of proof so we haven't investigated that. I'd like you to get for me. From all persons benefit regards how's that goes I'd like to know their number complaints about this particular one and then I'll visit off line with you about the number of complaints yet per individual pothole which is probably in the thousands but I'll talk to you about. Thank you yes Sir I will do that Senator Rapert you're recognized yes Mr Prior to my motion I will state we hear these. Not real record but that person before I've had three damages in. A few years ago it it's part of it it's not good I know are not put out a Statement after a previous meeting for people to call and that's about all you can do when everyone shows up calling and they'll get to this quick as they can as part of the day things we face each day I would make a motion to oppose the denial of the commission on this claim. I have a motion and a second saying no more questions all in favor say aye by any opposed no. Motion carries. This does conclude your bill description of the next calling please. This claim is claim number two one one one eight five James cleaner versus the Arkansas department of transportation clinic when it sought seven hundred forty three dollars in damage from are not alleging that he booked broke his vehicle shocks and struts on I. five thirty into North Little Rock are not answer denying liability and moved to dismiss the claim for failure to state facts supporting the cause of action Clement responded alleging that he encountered huge craters in the road causing front engine front end damage to his vehicle claimant argued that the case should not be dismissed because a subcontractor performing the freeway construction was responsible for keeping the open lanes safer motor vehicles and had failed to do so the claims commission denied and dismissed the claim upon our dots motion for summary judgment the commission found that are not made a prima facia showing that it was entitled to judgment as a matter of law but that the claimant fail to respond to the motion Furthermore the commission held that it did not have jurisdiction over the claim against the prime contractor because the contractor was not a state agency claiming appeals. Circular anything the commission like that no Sir I'm happy to take any questions there shall arise. The motion if lesser discussion. I have a motion the second C. and no other questions all in favor say aye. Any opposed no. Motion carries. This can would you have raised scriptural next claim please. This claim is claim number two two zero zero five eight Andrew Martin versus the Arkansas department of transportation claimant Martin sought unspecified damages from are not alleging that he damaged his vehicle on unrepaired section of road are not denied denied liability and moved to dismiss the claim for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted climate did not respond the claims commission enters an order granting Arnott's motion to dismiss the commission found the claimant had not alleged any specific facts related to or not the commission also found that the fact the vehicle was damaged was not by itself sufficient to demonstrate a claim against are not claiming appeals. Service anything commission like that no Sir but I'm happy to take any questions Senator Rice doubled denial of the claim I have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Motion carries Smith so Mister would you present the next. Claim please this claim is claim number two zero zero eight five zero Mitchell wine versus Arkansas alcohol beverage control this claim was filed on February twenty twenty and has a lengthy record which is been provided and summarized in brief Mr wind sought ten million twenty seven thousand five hundred dollars in damages from the Arkansas alcoholic beverage control for breach of contract which allegedly occurred when claimant's corporate entity was not selected for medical marijuana dispensary license selection was made based upon the application scores provided by responded respondents vendor PC Jean Clement alleged the part of this application was not score by PC G. thus breaching the contract entered into by all parties concerning scoring of the applications Clement argued that ABC failed to produce documentation of the score sheets in addition claimant asserted asserted that a contractual relationship existed between himself and ABC because he was required to pay seven thousand five hundred dollars for complete scoring of the application packet in the alternative claimant argued that he receive a lesser amount or be granted a medical marijuana dispensary license respondent denied liability affirmatively stating that there was no fruity of contract between the parties to the claim responded also argued that there was underlying litigation concerning the pending issues in state court and urged the commission to hold the claim in abeyance until the litigation was concluded the commission enters an order holding the claim in advance until parties advised the commission to the underlying litigation had concluded upon resumption of discovery claimant provided a link to the original score sheets from PSEG which expired twenty days there from claimant asserted that the documents were incomplete and moved for summary judgment respondent filed a motion to dismiss the claim both motions were denied by the claims commission and its order denying both motions the claims commission place the claim in advance for an additional sixty days to permit claimant's corporate entity to join the claim through council in order to assert the claim for lost profits the commission to. Night claimant's motion for reconsideration of its order on February tenth two thousand twenty two following a hearing on January fourteenth two thousand twenty two the claims commission denied and dismissed claims breach of contract claim finding the claimant was not a party or third party beneficiary to the contract between the medical marijuana commission and P. CG consequently the commission found that responded ABC was entitled to judgment as a matter of law concerning claims breach of contract claim the commission also rejected claims claims of fraud which he alleged were committed by various individuals during the course the litigation the commission found the claimant's allegations were made and emails motions an orderly at a hearing rather than in his original claim filing the commission found that this did not comply with Arkansas rules of civil procedure nine B. which requires the fraud claims to be stated with particularity in a pleading the Commission subsequently denied claimant's motion for reconsideration because it did not set forth any new or additional evidence which was not previously available claiming appeals. Service Commission everything that no Sir but I'm happy to take any questions are there any questions. Seeing no questions I have a motion to I have a motion to oppose the. Commissions. Degree you have not denied the Nile and dismissal. Yes. Yeah I have a motion to a as to the claim that was denied to older to dismissal. And a second hold favor say aye. All opposed no. Motion carries. Okay item five so right now. And I have this. Skews me we're just trying to make sure we're doing everything correctly. All right if there. There's no objection not entertain a motion the batch items D. five a foodie five G. appeals from denied and dismissed inmates claims do I have a motion to batch. I have a motion passed I have a second. Any discussion seeing none all in favor to batch say aye. Any opposed no. Motion carries hymns or batched. Now this out of the bin batched do I have a motion to affirm the decision of the claims commission concerning out of the eight the five two you have a motion I have a second all in favor say aye. You pose motion carries. Okay six. Appeals received outside the time frame scrubbed under Arkansas code. Nineteen ten that's twenty one eleven members we have for the last five claims on the agenda or appeals of decisions of the claim Commission that first minute outside of the time frame scribe prescribed in the Arkansas code. Annotated nineteen days ten best to eleven you will find a copy of the statue in your folder with highlighted in yellow although the commission receives is appealed after the statutory scribe times the Commission is of the option of that is required by law has highlighted peak on the copy your folder the transmitted to these the transmitted to these appeals to us this section provides that the commission must notify the General Assembly. When a notice of appeal is filed by the commission. I'm. Ninety first. Sorry I missed but I would feel this obligation to notify the subs sub a claim subcommittee is now it to subcommittee determine what action we would like to take regarding these two items. Senator Rice. Thank you Mr five claims in de six in the six by the were submitted outside the statutory time frames for appeal the Arkansas code annotated section nineteen nastiness to eleven a as such which chair I move that to subcommittee not consider these claims sent a letter to the parties are reporting the subcommittees action on Legislative Council adoption of our report my motion motion of second I have a second. No discussion all in favor say aye. Any opposed no. Motion carries. This is a gentleman that concludes our business today thank you all for coming and have a safe drive home thank you. Your.