Download - WIrnAMS LAW OFFICE pIk - psc.state.wv.us
WIrnAMS LAW OFFICE pIk One Union Sq., Bldg 2, Ste 201
Charleston, WV 25302
(304) 720-2448 facsimile (304) 720-2434
September 14,2009 L
Sandra Squire, Director Executive Secretary Division Public Service Commission of West Virginia 201 Brooks Street P.O. Box 812 Charleston, WV 25323
Fax: (304) 340-0325
Re: Case No. 09-1276-MC-FC, Dennis Austin v. Duane Zobrist Group, LLC, dba Greenbrier Valley Limo and Executive Services
Dear Ms. Squire:
Please be advised that I represent the Maintenance Workers Local 1 182, a local union affiliated with the West Virginia Appalachian Laborers District Council and the Laborers International Union of North America, I am recently in receipt of your letter dated September 3, 2009, to Mr. Dennis Austin and Mr. Duane Zobrist, and the attached Utilities Division Initial Memorandum dated September 2,2009, and the attached Initial Joint Staff Memorandum dated September 3,2009. Deficiencies in the Complaint were noted in the memorandums and your cover letter allows 10 days to respond in writing to address the deficiencies. I am unclear as to when the time periodLEEspond eiids-iiid I ETpectfull~reqSstptKat%is letter-ziiid the-- attachments hereto be considered as a portion of the response to your list of concerns. Furthermore, I respectfully request that the Complainant(s) be allowed additional time for further, more in depth, responses. Please consider the following.
~
Dennis Austin filed the Public Service Commission Complaint pro-se.
Dennis Austin is Local 1 182’s Vice President and a union steward, as well as an employee of the Greenbrier Hotel where he works as a chauffeur. The names and unverified signatures of the additional Complainants filed after Mr. Austin’s initial Complaint are those of union members and The Greenbrier Hotel employees also working in the guest transportation services area at the hotel.
Sandra Squire, Director September 14,2009 Page 2
Local 1 182 bargained long and hard with The Greenbrier Hotel for the exclusive right to provide the chauffeur and transportation services for the hotel’s guests. As I understand the P. S . C. M. C. Certificates awarded to Mr. Zobrist’s group, only when specific circumstances dictate, can the Greenbrier Valley Limo transport passengers to and fiom The Greenbrier Hotel and the Greenbrier Valley Airport.
I am currently performing my own investigation and gathering evidence to provide to you and the Public Service Commission. Additionally, I must now defend Mr. Austin and Mr. Delmas Workman, another union member and hotel employee that signed the additional list of complainants, because Mr. Zobrist has sued them in the Magistrate Court of Greenbrier County, West Virginia, for tortious interference with his contract with The Greenbrier Hotel. I am hopeful that discovery in the civil suit brought by Mr. Zobrist will shed some light on this matter and said discovery will be shared with the Public Service Commission.
To be very clear, Mr. Austin does not represent The Greenbrier Hotel (and did not intend for the Public Service Commission to believe he represented the hotel), but is an employee of the hotel along with other union members who have a very important stake in the outcome of this case. His actions were taken on behalf of Local 1 182’s membership in his capacity as the local’s Vice President and union steward.
Enclosed please find copies of the two separate Magistrate Court Complaints filed by Mr. Zobrist against Mr. Austin and Mr. Workman. Also enclosed are copies of Mr. Austin’s and Mr. Workman’s Answers. These are shared to help you understand the gravamen of Mr. Austin’s assertions.
I am hopeful that you will grant my request for an extension to correct the deficiencies you noted. If you do, in the very near future I believe I will be able to provide you with the additional pmof that complaint on the correct P.S.C. forms.
uested-along-withthe-formal-verifications and an amended
If you have any questions or comments please call me. My cell phone number is (304) 542-2736. My e-mail address is [email protected].
A
:RDW cc Gary Tillis
Phil Bostic Diane Parker Dennis Austin Delmas Workman Duane Zobrist Group llc
I
IN THE MAGISTRATE CQURT OF Laercfi b w L Name, Address & Phone Number of Plaintie
COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA
t
C M L COMPLAINT
, on bohalf of the plaintiff acting in the capacity
I NOTICE Any party in a civil action seeking over $20.00 or possession of real estate has L e right to elect that the CBSG be tried by a ' jury. You muat give noticc to tba magishate court eitbw 20 days from whcn Le first timely answer lo L e coinplaint is made or 5 days %om when service of the summons and complaint is made for unlawful entry and detainer actions. If you do nat notif) the magistrate c o w Within the appropriate time period, you give up yow right to B jury trial. The jury fee will be assassed against the losing party if the case i s tried by ajury or may be prorated between the particrs if the rase is mlcd before trial.
NOTICE OF ELECTION As plaintiff in tho above action, I wish to have a jury trial.
1 li 7yqw- -.am-: q- W'P.,'SYWLXUlp) ~ - , L ~ 7 ~ P l ~ ' - * ~ w*qe-ILprr .-*=A%*,.i'.iL9' ..=%-a. ... sigqawc Date
NOTICE: Any perron involved in court proceedings who has a dieability and needs special accommodations should inform the court sufUclentIy in advance sa tbat arrangements can be made if porsibla
W.V& Coda 05 50.4-1, SO-S-8(a); Mag. Ct. Civ. autea 1,6A 0 R e m r] Ddondant
SCA-M207 110.94
IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF GREENBRIER COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA
DUANE ZOBRIST GROUP LLC, DBA GREENBRIER VALLEY LIMOSINE
Plaintiff,
V. CASE NO. 09-M13C-00499
DENNIS AUSTIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND UNION STEWARD OF MAINTENANCE WORKERS LOCAL 1182
Defendant.
ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM
COMES now the Defendant, Dennis Austin and for his Answer to the Complaint
of Duane Zobrist Group LLC, dba Greenbrier Valley Limo hereby states the following:
FIRST DEFENSE
Plaintiffs Complaint fails to state a cause of action against this Defendant upon
which relief can be granted and should therefore be dismissed ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~~~
SECOND DEFENSE
In response to the specific allegations set forth in the complaint, defendant,
Dennis Austin denies being involved in tortuous interference and demands strict proof
thereof.
Defendant Dennis Austin denies actual knowledge of a contract between
Greenbrier Valley Limo and the Greenbrier and demands strict proof thereof and
production of said alleged contract.
Defendant Dennis Austin denies he has maliciously filed Complaints with the
West Virginia Public Service Commission.
Defendant Dennis Austin denies being involved in any malicious activity against
the Plaintiff.
Defendant Dennis Austin denies any other allegations not specifically admitted
herein.
THIRD DEFENSE
The Defendant Dennis Austin reserves the right to assert all defenses available to
him as the facts of the case through discovery prove applicable, including all those
available to him under any statute, constitution, common law or rule, including, but not
limited to, those defenses available under Rule 8(c) of the West Virginia Rules of Civil
Procedure.
FOURTH DEFENSE
To the extent that the facts of the case through discovery prove applicable, the
Plaintiff is barred by the applicable statute of limitations for not having instituted this -
e tiEmiEd-€$the-stitiite follWing %e acciSlTf the allegedcliims.
FIFTH DEFENSE
The Defendant Dennis Austin was not guilty of any negligence, tortiuous
interference or malicious conduct proximately causing or contributing to the damages
allegedly sustained by the Plaintiff.
SIXTH DEFENSE
If the Defendant Dennis Austin were guilty of any negligence, tortiuous
interference or malicious conduct, which is denied, such negligence tortiuous interference
2
or malicious conduct was not the proximate cause of the damages allegedly sustained by
the Plaintiff,
SEVENTH DEFENSE
Any alleged damages or injuries resulting to the Plaintiff are solely the result of
the negligence, tortiuous interference andor malicious conduct of a party or parties other
than the Defendant.
EIGHTH DEFENSE
The Plaintiffs’ claims asserted in the Complaint are completely without merit and,
therefore, the Defendant is entitled to an award for damages for attorney fees, litigation
costs and such other costs and expenses which may be awarded to a defendant under
federal andor state law.
NINTH DEFENSE
The Plaintiff is not entitled to any of the remedies alleged in the
Complaint and, therefore, those remedies must be stricken.
TENTH DEFENSE ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~
To the extent that the facts of the case thro@hdiscoveTy proGpplicaHShe
Defendants assert that Plaintiffs damages are caused by persons and entities over whom
the Defendant had no control.
ELEVENTH DEFENSE
The Defendant reserves the right to file additional affirmative defenses, counter
claims, cross-claims andor third-party claims if the sufficient or factual basis therefore is
developed through ongoing investigation and discovery.
3
TWELFTH DEFENSE
All or some of the claims in Plaintiffs’ Complaint are barred by the statute of
frauds.
By its own conduct, Plaintiff is estopped fiom pursing its claims against
Defendant. Therefore, to the extent Plaintiff has suffered any harm or damages, which is
expressly denied, Plaintiff is precluded from recovering against Defendant.
THIRTEENTH DEFENSE
All or some of the claims in Plaintiffs Complaint are barred by the doctrines of
payment and release.
FOURTEENTH DEFENSE
By its own conduct, Plaintiffs have waived, implicitly or explicitly, any and all
claims for relief against Defendant, or consented to Defendant’s conduct. Therefore, to
the extent that Plaintiffs have suffered any harm or damages, which are expressly denied,
Plaintiffs are precluded from recovering against Defendant for such harm or damages.
FIFTHTEENTH DEFENSE __
xtent Plaintiffs are seeking recovery for-breach07 conFact,P1$ntiff~
materially breached the terms and conditions of said contract and is entitled to no relief
thereon.
SIXTEENTH DEFENSE
All or some of the claims in Plaintiffs Complaint are barred due to Plaintiffs
failure and refusal to comply with all contractual and legal conditions precedent to this
lawsuit.
4
SEVENTHTEENTH DEFENSE
All or some of the claims in Plaintiffs Complaint are barred due to Plaintiffs
failure to mitigate its damages, if any, or must be reduced by those damages that Plaintiff
failed to mitigate.
EIGHTEENTH DEFENSE
All or some of the claims in Plaintiffs Complaint are barred to the extent that the
damages suffered by Plaintiff, if any, were the result of the acts or omissions of other
parties for which Defendant bears no responsibility.
NINETEENTH DEFENSE
All or some of the claims in Plaintiffs Complaint are barred by the doctrines of
set-off or recoupment.
TWENTIETH DEFENSE
The Plaintiff lacks standing to bring this action.
TWENTY-FIRST DEFENSE
The Defendant pleads the affirmative defenses of lack of jurisdiction over the
person, lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, improper venue, insufficiency of ~~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~ -
process, insufficiency of service of process and failure to mitigate damages.
TWENTY-SECOND DEFENSE
To the extent that any of the following affirmative defenses are applicable, based
upon the evidence adduced in this matter, the defenses of accord and satisfaction,
arbitration and award, contributory negligence, comparative negligence, assumption of
the risk, discharge in bankruptcy, duress, waiver, estoppel, failure of consideration, fraud,
illegality, injury by fellow servant, statute of limitation, laches, license, payment, release,
5
,
res judicata, statute of frauds, acquiescence, and any other matter constituting an
avoidance or affirmative defense.
TWENTY-THIRD DEFENSE
The Defendant reserves the right to amend this Answer and to add affirmative
defenses and matters in avoidance in accordance as such may be disclosed by further
investigation and discovery.
TWNTY-FOURTH DEFENSE
Defendant denies that Plaintiffs have any right to recovery herein and demands
that the Complaint be dismissed.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, having answered the Complaint filed against him, Dennis Austin
demands that it be dismissed and that he be awarded all costs and reasonable attorney
fees.
COUNTER CLAIM
Comes now the Defendant by his counsel Roger D. Williams, and sets forth the ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~
~~
following as allegations for his Counter Claim against the Plaintiff named herein, as
follows;
1. Defendant Dennis Austin is a resident of Greenbrier County, West Virginia; an
employee of the Greenbrier Hotel; and the local Vice President union steward of
Maintenance Workers Local 1 182 (a local union affiliated with the Laborers’
International Union of North America and the West Virginia Appalachian Laborers’
District Council, West Virginia AFL-CIO, a labor organization representing employees
for collective bargaining purposes, and is a “Union” as defined by the Labor Management
6
Relations Act (LMRA).
2.
with the Greenbrier Hotel, and pursuant to that agreement, provides union members
(hotel employees) to chauffeur and otherwise transport the hotel’s guests.
3.
bargaining agreement and Defendant Dennis Austin, as Vice President and steward of the
Maintenance Workers Local 1 182, filed a complaint against the Plaintiff with the West
Virginia Public Service Commission, the body that regulates common carriers such as the
Maintenance Workers Local 1 182 is a party to a collective bargaining agreement
Plaintiff has maliciously and tortiously interfered with said union’s collective
Plaintiff.
COUNT I - TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE
4.
allegedly authorizes the Plaintiff to provide transportation services only when the
Greenbrier Hotel’s own transportation capabilities cannot fill the needs of the hotel’s
guests.
5.
1182 er-Hotelpguestsoutsideth-e pE%%tEs of
the Public Service Commission Motor Carrier Certificates in such a way that it tortiously
interferes with the union’s collective bargaining agreement with the Greenbrier Hotel to
the detriment of the union members and hotel guests.
6.
1 182, alleges that Plaintiff transports Greenbrier Hotel guests outside the parameters of
the Public Service Commission Motor Carrier Certificates in such a way that it has
maliciously taken away bargained for union work, and is aimed at destroying andor
Plaintiff transports the Greenbrier Hotel guests under an alleged agreement that
Based upon information and belief, the Defendant, as Vice President of Local p~
Based upon information and belief, the Defendant, as Vice President of Local
7
harming the union’s contractual obligation with the Greenbrier Hotel to the detriment of
the union members and hotel guests.
COUNT I1 - ABUSE OF LEGAL PROCESS
7. On or about August 3,2009, Defendant, pro-se, filed a complaint against the
Plaintiff with the West Virginia Public Service Commission alleging that Plaintiff
transports Greenbrier Hotel guests outside the parameters of the Public Service
Commission Motor Carrier Certificates.
8. The instant Complaint against the instant Defendant has been filed in an attempt
to pre-empt the law and the proceedings before the West Virginia Public Service
Commission and to coerce the Defendant fiom exercising his contractual, legal and
constitutional rights and obligations to protect and defend the jurisdiction of union
membership.
9. The instant Complaint against the instant Defendant has been filed in an attempt
to pre-empt the law and the proceedings before the West Virginia Public Service ~~ ~~~~ ~~
Commission in an effort ta discourage or dissuade the legd exercise of the Defendant’s
individual and union rights and obligations.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, the Defendant demands judgment against the Plaintiff, in an
amount to be determined by the Honorable Court presiding, to include general and
special damages, punitive damages, costs and fees, and reasonable attorney fees.
8
Defendant Demands ajury trial.
DENNIS AUSTIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND UNION STEWARD OF MAINTENANCE WORKERS LOCAL 1182, By Counsel
Counsel for defendant Williams Law Office, PLLC One Union Sq., Bldg 2, Ste 201 Charleston, WV 25302 (304) 720-2434 Fax (304) 720-2448 rdwil liams@wvdsl .net
9
IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF GREENBRIER COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA
DUANE ZOBRIST GROUP LLC, DBA GREENBRIER VALLEY LIMO
Plaintiff,
V. CASE NO. 09-M13C-00499
DENNIS AUSTIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND UNION STEWARD OF MAINTENANCE WORKERS LOCAL 1182
Defendant.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Roger D. Williams, Esquire, counsel for the Defendant, Dennis Austin herein,
do hereby certify a copy of the Answer and Counter CZaim was served upon the party named
below, by depositing a true and exact copy with United States Postal Service addressed as
follows:
Duane Zobrist Group LLC, dba Greenbrier Valley Limo
This 14th day of September, 2009.
--fold here -- CIVIL COMPLAINT
NOTICE Any party in a civil action seeking over $20.00 or possession of real estate has the right to elect that the case be - ~~
must give s?&ten notice to the magistrate court either 20 days-fim whWthe-Erstpkiii&~r to .the cornplaint 18 made m when service of the -om gd.cogq4aiat i,9 made for unlawfbl enhy ad detainer actions. Ifyou do not notiiji the
'magistrata couit iwithin &e approp& time period, you give up your right to a jury trial. The jury fee wil1 be assessed against the losing party if the case is tried by a jury or may be prorated between the parties if the case is settled before trial.
@pTIoNAL) NOTICE OF ELE@TioN: As plaintiff in the above action, I wish to have a jury trial,
----i.runLLN-r.-., -I-yL-y -. .. :_ Date Signature
NOTICE: Any pereon hvolved lo court proceeding6 who has a disability and needs special accommodations should inform the court stdllchntly in advance eo that arrangements can be made if possfble.
W.V& Code 95 504.1, S0-5.8(a); Mag. Ct. Civ. Rules 2, ac\
SCAM207 I 10-94
0 Return 0 Dehdant 0 File
3 - 0 Phiatiff
1
IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF GREENBRIER COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA
DUANE ZOBRIST GROUP LLC, DBA GREENBRIER VALLEY LIMOSINE
Plaintiff,
V. CASE NO. 09-M13C-00500 DELMAS R. WORKMAN MAINTENANCE WORKERS LOCAL 1182
Defendant.
ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM
ANSWER
COMES now the Defendant, Delmas R. Workman and for his Answer to the
Complaint of Duane Zobrist Group LLC, dba Greenbrier Valley Limo hereby states the
following:
FIRST DEFENSE
Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a cause of action against this Defendant upon
which relief ~~~~ can be ~ granted and should ~~~~~ therefore be ~~ dismissed ~~~
~~~ ~~ ~~
SECOND DEFENSE
In response to the specific allegations set forth in the complaint, defendant,
Delmas R. Workman denies being involved in tortuous interference and demands strict
proof thereof.
Defendant Delmas R. Workman denies actual knowledge of a contract between
Greenbrier Valley Limo and The Greenbrier and demands strict proof thereof and
production of said alleged contract.
Defendant Delmas R. Workman denies he has maliciously spread demeaning
rumors and demands strict proof thereof
Defendant Delmas R. Workman denies he has filed a false complaint against the
plaintiff and demands strict proof thereof. Defendant admits he signed a Complaint that
was filed with the West Virginia Public Service Commission as did many of his union
brothers and sisters.
Defendant Delmas R. Workman denies being involved in any malicious activity
against the Plaintiff. ,
Defendant Delmas R. Workman denies any other allegations not specifically
admitted herein.
THIRD DEFENSE
The Defendant Delmas R. Workman reserves the right to assert all defenses
available to him as the facts of the case through discovery prove applicable, including all
those available to him under any statute, constitution, common law or rule, including, but
not limited to, those defenses available under Rule 8(c) of the West Virginia Rules of
FOURTH DEFENSE
To the extent that the facts of the case through discovery prove applicable, the
Plaintiff is barred by the applicable statute of limitations for not having instituted this
action with the time permitted by the statute following the accrual of the alleged claims.
2
FIFTH DEFENSE
The Defendant Delmas R. Workman was not guilty of any negligence, tortiuous
interference or malicious conduct proximately causing or contributing to the damages
allegedly sustained by the Plaintiff.
SIXTH DEFENSE
If the Defendant Delmas R. Workman were guilty of any negligence, tortiuous
interference or malicious conduct, which is denied, such negligence tortiuous interference
or malicious conduct was not the proximate cause of the damages allegedly sustained by
the Plaintiff.
SEVENTH DEFENSE
Any alleged damages or injuries resulting to the Plaintiff are solely the result of
the negligence, tortiuous interference and/or malicious conduct of a party or parties other
than the Defendant.
EIGHTH DEFENSE
The Plaintiffs’ claims asserted in the Complaint are completely without merit and, _ _ _ ~ ______ _ _ _ _ ~ ~~~~ _____ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ _ _ _____
therefore, the Defendant is entitled to an award for damages for attorney fees, litigation
costs and such other costs and expenses which may be awarded to a defendant under
federal andor state law.
NINTH DEFENSE
The Plaintiff is not entitled to any of the remedies alleged in the Complaint and,
therefore, those remedies must be stricken.
3
TENTH DEFENSE
To the extent that the facts of the case through discovery prove applicable, the
Defendant asserts that Plaintiffs damages are caused by persons and entities over whom
the Defendant had no control.
ELEVENTH DEFENSE
The Defendant reserves the right to file additional affirmative defenses, counter
claims, cross-claims and/or third-party claims if the sufficient or factual basis therefore is
developed through ongoing investigation and discovery.
TWELFTH DEFENSE
All or some of the claims in Plaintiffs’ Complaint are barred by the statute of
frauds.
By its own conduct, Plaintiff is estopped from pursing its claims against
Defendant. Therefore, to the extent Plaintiff has suffered any harm or damages, which is
expressly denied, Plaintiff is precluded from recovering against Defendant.
THIRTEENTH DEFENSE
payment and release.
FOURTEENTH DEFENSE
By its own conduct, Plaintiffs have waived, implicitly or explicitly, any and all
claims for relief against Defendant, or consented to Defendant’s conduct. Therefore, to
the extent that Plaintiffs have suffered any harm or damages, which are expressly denied,
Plaintiffs are precluded from recovering against Defendant for such harm or damages.
4
FIFTHTEENTH DEFENSE
To the extent Plaintiffs are seeking recovery for breach of contract, Plaintiff
materially breached the terms and conditions of said contract and is entitled to no relief
thereon.
SIXTEENTH DEFENSE
All or some of the claims in Plaintiffs Complaint are barred due to Plaintiffs
failure and refusal to comply with all contractual and legal conditions precedent to this
lawsuit.
SEVENTHTEENTH DEFENSE
All or some of the claims in Plaintiffs Complaint are barred due to Plaintiffs
failure to mitigate its damages, if any, or must be reduced by those damages that Plaintiff
failed to mitigate.
EIGHTEENTH DEFENSE
All or some of the claims in Plaintiffs Complaint are barred to the extent that the
damages suffered by Plaintiff, if any, were the result of the acts or omissions of other
NINETEENTH DEFENSE
All or some of the claims in Plaintiffs Complaint are barred by the doctrines of
set-off or recoupment.
TWENTIETH DEFENSE
The Plaintiff lacks standing to bring this action,
5
TWENTY-FIRST DEFENSE
The Defendant pleads the affirmative defenses of lack of jurisdiction over the
person, lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, improper venue, insufficiency of
process, insufficiency of service of process and failure to mitigate damages.
TWENTY-SECOND DEFENSE
To the extent that any of the following affirmative defenses are applicable, based
upon the evidence adduced in this matter, the defenses of accord and satisfaction,
arbitration and award, contributory negligence, comparative negligence, assumption of
the risk, discharge in bankruptcy, duress, waiver, estoppel, failure of consideration, fraud,
illegality, injury by fellow servant, statute of limitation, laches, license, payment, release,
res judicata, statute of frauds, acquiescence, and any other matter constituting an
avoidance or affirmative defense.
TWENTY-THIRD DEFENSE
The Defendant reserves the right to amend this Answer and to add affirmative
defenses and matters in avoidance in accordance as such may be disclosed by M e r
investigation and discovery. ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~
TWENTY-FOURTH DEFENSE
Defendant denies that Plaintiffs have any right to recovery herein and demands
that the Complaint be dismissed.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, having answered the Complaint filed against him, Delmas R.
Workman demands that it be dismissed and that he be awarded all costs and reasonable
attorney fees.
6
COUNTER CLAIM
Comes now the Defendant by his counsel Roger D. Williams, and sets forth the
following as allegations for his Counter Claim against the Plaintiff named herein, as
follows;
1. Defendant Delmas R. Workman is a resident of Greenbrier County, West
Virginia; an employee of the Greenbrier Hotel; and a member of Maintenance Workers
Local 1 182, a local union affiliated with the Laborers’ International Union of North
America and the West Virginia Appalachian Laborers’ District Council, West Virginia
AFL-CIO, a labor organization representing employees for collective bargaining
purposes, and is a “Union” as defined by the Labor Management
Relations Act (LMRA).
2.
with the Greenbrier Hotel, and pursuant to that agreement, provides union members
Maintenance Workers Local 1182 is a party to a collective bargaining agreement
(hotel employees) to chauffeur and otherwise transport the hotel’s guests.
3.
bargaining agreement and Defendant Delmas R. Workman, as a member of the
~~ Plaintiff ~ _ _ has maliciously ~ and tortiously ~~~~~ interfered with ~~ said union’s collective
Maintenance Workers Local 1 182, signed, along with other union members, a complaint
against the Plaintiff with the West Virginia Public Service Commission, the body that
regulates common carriers such as the Plaintiff.
COUNT I - TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE
4. Plaintiff transports the Greenbrier Hotel guests under an alleged agreement that
allegedly authorizes the Plaintiff to provide transportation services only when the
7
Greenbrier Hotel’s own transportation capabilities cannot fill the needs of the hotel’s
guests.
5 . Based upon information and belief, the Defendant, alleges that Plaintiff transports
Greenbrier Hotel guests outside the parameters of the Public Service Commission Motor
Carrier Certificates in such a way that it tortiously interferes with the union’s collective
bargaining agreement with the Greenbrier Hotel to the detriment of the union members
and hotel guests.
6 . Based upon information and belief, the Defendant, as a member of Local 1 182,
alleges that Plaintiff transports Greenbrier Hotel guests outside the parameters of the
Public Service Commission Motor Carrier Certificates in such a way that it has
maliciously taken away bargained for union work, and is aimed at destroying andor
harming the union’s contractual obligation with the Greenbrier Hotel to the detriment of
the Defendant and other union members and hotel guests.
COUNT I1 -ABUSE OF LEGAL PROCESS
7. On or about August 3,2009, Dennis Austin a defendant in a similar action - ~ _ _ _ _ _ ~~
broughaefse this Cow, (Case N o wM13C-m99),prfi& bsamcePresidentand
union steward of Maintenance Workers Local 1 182 filed a complaint against the Plaintiff
with the West Virginia Public Service Commission alleging that Plaintiff transports
Greenbrier Hotel guests outside the parameters of the Public Service Commission Motor
Carrier Certificates. Defendant, Delmas Workman signed an amendment to the
Complaint to be added as an additional complainant along with other union members..
8. The instant Complaint against the instant Defendant has been filed in an attempt
to pre-empt the law and the proceedings before the West Virginia Public Service
Commission and to coerce the Defendant from exercising his contractual, legal and
constitutional rights and obligations to protect and defend the jurisdiction of union
membership.
9.
to pre-empt the law and the proceedings before the West Virginia Public Service
Commission in an effort to discourage or dissuade the legal exercise of the Defendant’s
individual and union rights and obligations.
The instant Complaint against the instant Defendant has been filed in an attempt
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, the Defendant demands judgment against the Plaintiff, in an
amount to be determined by the Honorable Court presiding, to include general and
special damages, punitive damages, costs and fees, and reasonable attorney fees.
Defendant Demands a jury trial.
DELMAS R. WORKMAN, MAINTENANCE WORKERS LOCAL 1182, By Counsel
~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~
Counsel for defendant Williams Law Office, PLLC One Union Sq., Bldg 2, Ste 201 Charleston, WV 25302 (304) 720-2434 Fax (304) 720-2448 [email protected]
9
IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF GREENBRIER COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA
DUANE ZOBRIST GROUP LLC, DBA GREENBRIER VALLEY LIMOSINE
Plaintiff,
V. CASE NO. 09-M13C-00500
DELMAS R. WORKMAN MAINTENANCE WORKERS LOCAL 1182
Defendant.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Roger D. Williams, Esquire, counsel for the Defendant, Dennis Austin herein,
do hereby certify a copy of the Answer and Counter Claim was served upon the party named
below, by depositing a true and exact copy with United States Postal Service addressed as
follows:
Duane Zobrist Group LLC, dba Greenbrier Valley Limo Rt 2 Box 515E
~ Ronceverte, ~ ~ ~ _ _ _ _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ WV 24970 ~ ~~
~~~~~~ ~~
This 14th day of September, 2009.