Case Number: CV 20110094
Plaintiff(s): State Of Ohio
Defendant(s): Raichyk, Mj; Raichyk, Mya Lee
For the court's full docket listing, including the mailings, costs, fees, subpoenas, and returns, so the reader can see the machine-works and the timing for maneuvers and the suspended animation while it's wondered what would come next, click here.
The docket climax is multi-peaked though boring in appearance. The vandal-2bit-thug Steven Dick rushed to get the case filed (Feb 2nd, 2011) when he found out that we were considering taking him to court for his history of denial of proper administrative service and for his harassment, on top of primary charges of incidents of his vandalism (civil court's requirement for proving a prime suspect in vandalism is culpable is 'most likely' since the liabilities are not jailtime, but monetary damages, unlike criminal court charges needing 'without a reasonable doubt' for conviction and incarceration). He pushed our case ahead of cases that he had set up as the next public health nuisance charges for 3 months before ours. So we contacted one of the people listed on his agenda at the BOH meeting as being on their third notice with no response.
Lo an behold, the Brown Avenue address turned out to be an elderly couple, agitated because they knew that Steven Dick was fraudulently charging them, that when the Dick and his Sheriff's sidekick came to do the 'nuisance' test, they had found nothing that they could detect, yet the Dick charged them anyway.
Coincidentally, I'm sure, the mayor of the adjacent village was canvassing the area that month already, seeking support for annexing the homes in that neighborhood and putting them on the sewer system extension that he was grandly planning.
Plus, the elderly couple said that their suspicion was that one of the others on that block was an part-time sheriff's man whose home was known to be 'sub-standard' in the septic system category. How many reasons does it take, and who was pulling together the scheme.
When we talked to the sewerage treatment manager, he seemed rather puzzled that Steven Dick's name should be mentioned by this out-of-the-blue caller, not from his customer base, and bringing something novel to his attention. Namely the possibility that those forced to hook-up in the extension of that troubled system, might be able, under the law to withdraw any interest by using what is called a 'non-conforming variance' that's available to anyone whose septic system is not failing at the moment.
And even that the sewage costs (plugged into my mathematical model), in amounts that he was reeling off from his memory of planning details, would make the hookup option thoroughly unappealing to anyone not planning to move and unload the costs in the future on some unsuspecting buyer whose perception of being free of septic tank 'operation' was based on ignorance.
The manager was rather urgently suggesting that my next call should be to the mayor himself to check on what enthusiasm he was finding in his campaigning for the sewer extension and area annexation. How many callers would he need to tell him they were not interested, before the sewerage treatment manager would figure it was time to look for another job. From his comments, his impressions were taken from what Steven Dick had told them not that long ago.
Obviously this was so shocking a criminal act by the Dick. And it curiously triggered a recollection of the comment by the Dick's sidekick when they arrived at our home with the search warrant to see if we were indeed 'occupying' the home without the Dick's permission. The earnest fellow insisted that the Dick was a nice fellow and had already demonstrated that niceness by not charging those people (without naming anyone) where he and Dick had done some test and whose systems had no sign of sewage nuisance. Guess the Dick fooled his sidekick.
So we went to gather tax data (and the mayor would have the figure for initial fees for hooking up) and figure an economic impact calculation so that these people could defend themselves, or at least the elderly fellow was wanting to challenge the 'condemnation' of his system. To see how long I had to do this (since the preliminary numbers looked so supportive of seeking a non-conforming variance to not be forced to hookup to the sewer system if the area did get annexed and if the fellow could fight the false charge) so that it could be pursued, I contacted the current Asst Prosecutor.
Unfortunately, the previous fellow who had handled our earlier disagreement with Dick, had moved on, and now some fellow named Steve Purtell was handling Dick's charges. He said he had the Brown Avenue case on his desk and hadn't done anything with it yet, so I asked him to fax it to me under FOIA if necessary. When it arrived, It looked roughly like the charges in a sewage nuisance citation, plus a notarized statement that Dick swore to the truth (ummm.. lies) of his filing, and the 'content' was preceded with a 'court front page'.
Apparently it hadn't been put in the court's intake office, but ours had. So we shifted gears and began reading up on court procedures and getting ready. It didn't matter that we were no longer pursuing anything on the Brown Avenue case anyway, since the elderly woman had a near heart attack when her husband wanted to challenge the Dick's court threat, and she was spending the week in the hospital, with the fellow trying desperately to keep body and soul together and relinquishing any further interest in court battles and raising his head.
After that, we were on the Court clock's treadmill. Filing responses, seeking clarifications, countering falsehoods, and trying to get the right laws acknowledged. Purtell/Dick refused to even mention the ORC3718 sewage law, sticking instead to the ODH 'rules' charges, ignoring that he had no evidence stated of nuisance, though that was the 'resolution' they were demanding. Unreal and thoroughly confusing.. They even claimed that they were 'the STATE OF OHIO' who was charging us as public health nuisances, but under the wrong 'authority' rules. If it had been in a movie, it would have been a farce.
If it had been 'the State of Ohio' then our countersuit would have to be moved to a different court than common pleas, so we struggled to get the magistrate to acknowledge that the filing was in need of clarifications, including how the 'sewage' authority (for LIQUID WASTE) was being used to denigrate our dry composting, among other things. It took a couple of hearings and filings and counter this and that, til we determined that the 'Plaintiff' was just the BOH, not the STATE, and so we filed our countersuit. And the process ground to a halt.
Subpoenas were quashed, the next court date was canceled and we were eventually told that another attorney TEAM (from some place called CORSA) would be taking charge of the Plaintiff's case, besides Purtell, and the magistrate was being replaced by the JUDGE, named Gusweiler, who made up another schedule to get started over again, allowing time for the team to get on board by September.
CORSA turned out to be the 'shared risk' liability insurance team that defend county officials and their whole role was to file a Motion for Dismissal of our countersuit, on some phony basis, using 'case law' that they claimed made county officials 'immune' to prosecution. We looked at their cited case and the case-law they claimed as their basis and lo and behold, it was untrue that the law meant what they said.
Their logic ignored a crucial part of the law (ORC 2744.03(A)(6)) that protected citizens, by claiming that the law was only to 'defend' officials. Clearly, it was not doing any thing of the sort.
The law defended citizens from officials whose actions were 'malicious, in bad faith, wanton or reckless'. Apparently it's inconceivable to the judges, appeal and supreme court even, that the legislature could have balanced their 'defending' to ensure people were treated decently by public 'servants'.
The judge wrote that the CORSA document was 'well taken' and that lawyer should write the court's decision as final to dismiss our case. We protested and prepared to take that decision to Appeal Court, while simultaneously trying to get ready for the rest of the trial, which was curiously in a hurry. So much so that the day arrived in November and the CClerks hadn't served subpoenas to all who were needed and the Judge offered a continuance, which we took, as you may agree was just in time for us to spin around and file our Brief at the Appeal Court. We battled the CORSA lawyer, this time unravelling his argument and hoping the Appeal Court would act on the arguing quickly so we could legendarily have Steve Dick disqualified as a decent 'expert' at the main trial, though we surely were prepared to demonstrate his lack of expertise (in his mound manual he force DIyers to follow back when this battle started) as well as his 'malperforming' as a civil servant, complete with FOIA data on his tormenting and cheating the Rose family, as you will see in the transcript we ordered of David Rose's testimony.