grimsley v bentley
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
1/55
AlaFileE-Notice
To: DILLARDJOELEVAN
03-CV-2016-900483.00
NOTICEOFELECTRONICFILING
INTHECIRCUITCOURTOFMONTGOMERYCOUNTY,ALABAMA
ThefollowingcomplaintwasFILEDon4/11/20169:38:27AM
CHARLESGRIMSLEYV.ROBERTBENTLEYETAL
03-CV-2016-900483.00
NoticeDate: 4/11/20169:38:27AM
TIFFANYB.MCCORD
CIRCUITCOURTCLERK
MONTGOMERYCOUNTY,ALABAMA
MONTGOMERY,AL36104
334-832-1260
251S.LAWRENCESTREET
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
2/55
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, ALABAMA
CHARLES GRIMSLEY, ) )
Plaintiff, )
)v. )CASE NO. CV-2016-900483.00
)GOVERNOR ROBERT BENTLEY, )individually and in his )official capacity as an )officer of the State of )Alabama; COMMISSIONER )GUNTER GUY, individually )and in his official )
capacity as an officer )of the State of Alabama, )LUTHER STRANGE, individ- )ually and in his official )capacity as an officer )of the State of Alabama; )WILLIAM NEWTON, individ- )ually and in his official )capacity as State Finance )Director and R. COOPER SHATTUCK )
individually and as Executive )Director of the University of )Alabama Systems Gulf State )Park Project and an officer )of the State of Alabama, )
)Defendants. )
____________________________________________________________
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT,TO CHALLENGE AND RESTRAIN STATE OFFICERS ENGAGED
IN THE UNLAWFUL DISBURSEMENT OF STATE FUNDS,AND FOR A WRIT OF QUO WARRANTO
____________________________________________________________
Comes Plaintiff, pursuant to his right as a taxpayer to
challenge, by way of a declaratory judgment, the unlawful
ELECTRONICALLY FILED4/11/2016 9:38 AM
03-CV-2016-900483.00CIRCUIT COURT OF
MONTGOMERY COUNTY, ALABATIFFANY B. MCCORD, CLERK
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
3/55
disbursement of state funds by state officers, to obtain
an order restraining the state officers named herein from
further unlawfully disbursing state funds, an order for an
accounting of all unlawfully disbursed state funds and an
order requiring restitution of such unlawfully disbursed
state funds.
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff is a former Commissioner of the State
Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, a resident
Alabama citizen and taxpayer, and a private citizen with
standing to challenge the unlawful disbursements of state
funds complained of herein, and to proceed on behalf of the
State of Alabama by the quo warranto provisions cited in the
body of this complaint. His standing to maintain this
civil action suit to restrain unlawful disbursements of
specific state funds and to bring this quo warranto action
is accurately described and stated herein.
2. Defendant Robert Bentley is the Governor of the
State of Alabama, and an officer of the State of Alabama
acting in concert with the remaining named defendants to
unlawfully disburse and expend the state funds identified
herein and to daily participate in the usurpations and
2
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
4/55
intrusion on the state office of General Counsel to The
University of Alabama System described herein.
3. Defendant Luther Strange is the Attorney General
of Alabama, and is an officer of the State of Alabama acting
in concert with the remaining named defendants herein to
allow them to unlawfully disburse the state funds identified
herein and accomplish the usurpations and intrusions upon
the state office of General Counsel of The University of
Alabama System described herein.
4. Defendant Gunter Guy is the State Commissioner of
Conservation and Natural Resources and is an officer of the
State of Alabama acting in concert with the remaining named
defendants herein to unlawfully disburse the state funds
identified herein and accomplish the usurpations and
intrusions upon the state office of General Counsel of The
University of Alabama System described herein.
5. Defendant William Newton is the State Finance
Director and is an officer of the State of Alabama acting in
concert with the remaining named defendants herein to allow
them to unlawfully disburse the state funds identified
herein and accomplish the usurpations and intrusions upon
3
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
5/55
the state office of General Counsel of The University of
Alabama System described herein.
6. Defendant R. Cooper Shattuck is the University of
Alabama Systems Gulf State Park Project Executive Director
and the designated officer for all contract negotiations,
interpretations and legal decisions designated by Defendant
Robert J. Bentley to coordinate and execute contracts on
behalf of the Gulf State Park Project Enhancement Team
composed of The University of Alabama System, the Office of
the Governor of the State of Alabama and the Alabama State
Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. Defendant
Shattuck was transferred from employment in the Office of
the Governor of Alabama by Defendant Robert Bentley and his
former Senior Political Advisor to spearhead the Governors
Gulf State Park Enhancement Project with a salary paid by
sources not authorized by the GSPA, and in so doing acts and
has acted in concert with the remaining named defendants
herein to unlawfully spend the state funds identified
herein, and he will continue to do so unless restrained by
an order from this Honorable Court.
4
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
6/55
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
7. The Circuit Court for Montgomery County, Alabama
is the sole appropriate circuit court vested with
jurisdiction to hear and decide this Declaratory Judgment
Action against the named Defendants, and venue for
Plaintiffs challenge of the unlawful disbursements of state
funds complained of herein lies exclusively with the Circuit
Court for Montgomery County, Alabama.
ALLEGATIONS OF FACT
8. On or about August 1, 2013, after the Alabama
State Legislature enacted Act No. 2013-222 and Defendant
Governor Robert Bentley signed that act into law, it became
effective and was compiled into laws of the State of Alabama
as Code of Ala., 9-14E-1 through 9-14E-10 as the Gulf
State Park Projects Act (hereinafter referred to as the
GSPA).
9. The GSPA defined the Gulf State Park as [t]he
real property comprising approximately 6,150 acres, and any
future additions thereto, including facilities and fixtures
located thereon and appurtenances thereto, owned and managed
by the state and the department in south Baldwin County,
Alabama.
5
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
7/55
10. The GSPA defined the Project as [r]eal and
personal property located on the approximately 29 acre
project site in the Gulf State Park, as described in sub-
division (12), to consist of some or all of the following:
Lodge facilities; conference, education and meeting space;
banquet areas; primary and specialty restaurants; recreation
and other facilities; business centers; and infrastructure
such as parking facilities; transportation facilities for
pedestrian and vehicular traffic; utilities; and other
structures or improvements as presented by the Governor in a
request for proposal provided herein or any other subsequent
hearing request.
11. The GSPA defined Project Revenues as [a]ll
gross earnings, income, receipts, lease payments, revenues,
and other moneys derived from or with respect to the
project.
12. The GSPA defined the Project Site as [t]he real
property located within Gulf State Park of approximately 29
acres more particularly described as follows: POC (Point of
Commencement) SW Corner Section 16, T9S, R4E; thence N 89
degrees 49'16"E, 5,290 feet to a calculated point in Lake
Shelby, being the SE corner of Section 16: Thence South
6
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
8/55
644ft to a point, on the south ROW (Right of Way) of State
Road 182 and the east boundary of a deed with restrictions
(Deed Book 55n.s., Page 363-4, Baldwin Co.), being the POB
(Point of Beginning); thence eastwardly along said ROW for
2,644ft more or less to a point; thence south leaving said
ROW and passing east of existing cul-de-sac for 351ft more
or less to the CCL (Coastal Construction Line); thence
westward along CCL (Coastal Construction Line) for 2,592ft
more or less to a point on the East boundary of said deed;
thence north leaving CCL (Coastal Construction Line) and
along East boundary of said deed for 826ft more or less back
to the POB all containing 29.1AC+/-.
13. The GSPA provides, at Code of Ala., 9-14E-9:
Source of Funds. Other than project revenues,
only National Resource Damage Assessment funds orRestore Act funds may be expended to implementthis chapter. If the State of Alabama does notreceive or has not been awarded any NationalResource Damage Assessment funds or Restore Actfunds for the purposes of this chapter by December31, 2015, this chapter is repealed on January 1,2016.
14. On or about March 17, 2016, Defendants began
expending state funds on the Project to prepare a foundation
for the lodge and conference center described by the GSPA,
within the site also described by the GSPA, and Defendant R.
7
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
9/55
Cooper Shattuck announced publicly on behalf of all named
Defendants:
The current work on the lodge is being funded
with monies awarded the project last year fromgrant funds provided by BP in 2010.
Attached as Exhibit A to this complaint is the Associated
Presss published report, dated March 18, 2016 at 12:07 PM,
through which Defendant R. Cooper Shattuck made this public
announcement.
15. In 2010, the current Gulf State Park Project did
not exist, its enabling act not taking effect until Act No.
2013-222 was enacted in 2013, and no grant funds provided
by BP in 2010 are authorized by the GSPA to be spent on the
Gulf State Park Project it describes.
16. The state funds currently being disbursed by the
named defendants, each in concert with the remaining named
defendants, are unlawful and violative of the Gulf State
Park Projects enabling act, Code of Ala., 9-14E-9, which
allows only project revenues, or National Resource Damage
Assessment funds, or Restore Act funds to be spent for
the purposes of this chapter.
17. The state funds being currently expended by
Defendants at this time, beginning March 17, 2016 and now
8
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
10/55
being disbursed by them each day, are being unlawfully
expended and disbursed because they are not derived from any
source of funds allowed by Alabama law for the Gulf State
Project. Indeed, the Project did not exist in 2010, when
Defendant R. Cooper Shattuck admits the state funds
currently being spent were provided by BP.
18. The BP block grant state funds that are being
currently spent by Defendants for lodge foundation work at
Gulf State Park are, and will continue to be, unless
restrained by this Honorable Court, unlawful and in clear
violation of Code of Ala., 9-14E-1, et seq., which became
effective August 1, 2013, and at 9-14E-9, provides in
pertinent part:
Source of Funds. Other than project revenues,
only National Resource Damage Assessment funds orRestore Act funds may be expended to implementthis chapter. If the State of Alabama does notreceive or has not been awarded any NationalResource Damage Assessment funds or Restore Actfunds for the purposes of this chapter by December31, 2015, this chapter is repealed on January 1,2016.
19. The funds currently being spent by Defendants at
Gulf State Park for lodge foundation work are neither
National Resource Damage Assessment funds nor Restore Act
funds nor project revenues. Indeed, the Gulf State Park
9
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
11/55
Project for which they are being expended did not exist
until 2013, and no National Resource Damage Assessment funds
or Restore Act funds have been lawfully awarded.
20. Defendants attempted to obtain approval to spend
National Resource Damage Assessment funds for construction
of the project described by this complaint and by Code of
Ala., 9-14E-1, et seq., but that attempt was enjoined by
the United States District Court for the Southern District
of Alabama on February 16, 2016. A copy of the Judgment and
Order of the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Alabama enjoining Defendants proposed spending
of National Resource Damage Assessment funds is attached as
Exhibit B to this complaint.
21. Without any lawful funds to spend upon the Project
at Gulf State Park, Defendants have boldly, unlawfully and
hastily proceeded to illegally spend state grant funds
provided by BP in 2010 upon current work on the lodge in
a manner disallowed by Code of Ala., 9-14E-1, et seq.
This unlawful and illegal spending will continue unabated
unless restrained by an appropriate order entered by this
Honorable Court.
10
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
12/55
____________________________________________________________
COUNT ONE
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
AND CHALLENGE TO RESTRAIN STATE OFFICERS ENGAGEDIN THE UNLAWFUL DISBURSEMENT OF STATE FUNDS____________________________________________________________
22. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all preceding
allegations contained in this complaint in support of this
Count One.
23. Plaintiff brings this civil action pursuant to the
Alabama Declaratory Judgment Act, Code of Ala., 66-220 et
seq., Rule 57, Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, and case
law decided by the Supreme Court of Alabama in Ex parte
Chemical Waste Management, Inc., 929 So.2d 1007, 1013 (Ala.
2005); Zeigler v. Baker, 344 So.2d 761, 763-764 (Ala. 1977);
Goode v. Tyler, 237 Ala. 106, 109 (Ala. 1939) to obtain a
judicial declaration that Defendants are engaged in an
unlawful disbursement of state funds at Gulf State Park, and
to restrain them from doing so.
24. Plaintiff is a person under Code of Ala., 6-6-
220. His rights, status and legal relations have been
rendered uncertain and insecure by the acts of Defendants
complained of herein and he is entitled, under Code of Ala.,
11
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
13/55
6-6-221 to have his and Defendants rights, status and
other legal obligations by this action liberally construed
and administered. Plaintiff is also entitled, under
Alabama law, to seek from this Honorable Court, pursuant to
Code of Ala., 6-6-222, a declaration that Defendants
disbursements of state funds described herein are unlawful,
and to have them restrained by an appropriate order entered
by this Honorable Court pursuant to Code of Ala., 6-6-230.
25. Plaintiff pursues this declaratory judgment remedy
pursuant to the above-cited statutory authority which allows
him, as a taxpayer, to challenge and restrain unlawful
disbursements of state funds. Ex parte Chemical Waste
Management, Inc., 929 So.2d 1007, 1013 (Ala. 2005); Zeigler
v. Baker, 344 So.2d 761, 763-764 (Ala. 1977); Goode v.
Tyler, 237 Ala. 106, 109 (Ala. 1939).
Wherefore, Plaintiff respectfully demands that this
Honorable Court enter a declaratory judgment holding that
Defendants have unlawfully spent the state funds identified
herein, and as further relief pursuant to Code of Ala., 6-
6-230, enter an order restraining them from further spending
such funds, or any funds whatsoever, in violation of Code of
Ala., 9-14E-1, et seq. Plaintiff additionally seeks an
12
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
14/55
order from this Honorable Court for an accounting of all
funds unlawfully spent in violation of Code of Ala., 9-
14E-1, et seq. and restitution of those funds.
____________________________________________________________
COUNT TWO
PETITION WRIT OF QUO WARRANTO____________________________________________________________
26. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all preceding
allegations contained in this complaint in support of this
Count Two.
27. Defendant R. Cooper Shattuck is paid a salary from
state funds, through the University of Alabama System, to
spearhead Defendant Robert Bentleys Gulf State Park
Enhancement Project in a manner that violates Code of Ala.,
9-14E-1, et seq., which became effective August 1, 2013,
and at 9-14E-9, provides in pertinent part:
Source of Funds. Other than project revenues,only National Resource Damage Assessment funds orRestore Act funds may be expended to implementthis chapter. If the State of Alabama does notreceive or has not been awarded any NationalResource Damage Assessment funds or Restore Actfunds for the purposes of this chapter by December31, 2015, this chapter is repealed on January 1,2016.
28. Defendant R. Cooper Shattuck, and other State of
Alabama employees of the University of Alabama System who
13
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
15/55
act at his direction in connection with his service as
Executive Director of The University of Alabama Systems
Gulf State Park Project, daily foment unlawful disbursement
of state funds to implement the Gulf State Park Project at
Gulf State Park in violation of Code of Ala., 9-14E-9, and
these usurpations and intrusions upon the office of General
Counsel of The University of Alabama System are not only
subject to restraint pursuant to case law decided by the
Supreme Court of Alabama in Ex parte Chemical Waste
Management, Inc., 929 So.2d 1007, 1013 (Ala. 2005); Zeigler
v. Baker, 344 So.2d 761, 763-764 (Ala. 1977); Goode v.
Tyler, 237 Ala. 106, 109 (Ala. 1939), but also pursuant to
the quo warranto provisions of Code of Ala., 6-6-590, et
seq.
29. In the course of spearheading Defendant Robert
Bentleys Gulf State Park Enhancement Project in a manner
that violates Code of Ala., 9-14E-1, et seq., which became
effective August 1, 2013, Defendant R. Cooper Shattuck, has
acted, and continues to act daily, in concert with each of
the remaining named Defendants to also participate in the
unlawful disbursement of state funds to pay other University
of Alabama System employees to work on Defendant Robert
14
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
16/55
Bentleys Gulf State Park Enhancement Project while being
paid by state funds from state sources legally barred by
Code of Ala., 9-14E-1. Defendants have also knowingly and
willfully allowed state funds to be illegally spent from
sources disallowed by Code of Ala., 9-14E-1 for attendant
costs associated with the usurpation and intrusion upon
Defendant R. Cooper Shattucks intrusion of the Gulf State
Park Enhancement Project onto his office as General Counsel
of The University of Alabama System.
30. Plaintiff therefore invokes the remedial writ of
Quo Warranto, codified at Code of Ala., 6-6-590, et seq.,
in the name of the State of Alabama, to compel Defendant R.
Cooper Shattuck to cease the usurpation and intrusion upon
his public office as general counsel to the University of
Alabama System of expenditures of state funds disallowed by
Code of Ala., 9-14E-1 for his salary and professional
services, and the salaries and professional services of any
and all University of Alabama System employees working under
his direction for Defendant Robert Bentleys Gulf State Park
Enhancement Project.
31. A copy of University of Alabama Systems current
website posting, describing and admitting Defendant R.
15
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
17/55
Cooper Shattucks allowance of Defendant Robert Bentleys
Gulf State Park Enhancement Project to usurp and intrude
upon his office as General Counsel to the University of
Alabama System, depleting state funds from sources other
than those allowed by Code of Ala., 9-14E-1 to be expended
to implement the GSPA is attached as Exhibit C to this
complaint.
Wherefore, as a private person empowered to bring this
action in the name of the State of Alabama, to restrain
unlawful disbursements of state funds and daily usurpations
and intrusions upon the state office of General Counsel to
the University of Alabama System, Plaintiff prays and
requests:
A. Pursuant to Code of Ala., 6-6591(b), that this
Honorable Court direct that this action be commenced, upon
its preliminary belief that the acts specified herein can be
proved and that it is necessary for the public good;
B. Alternatively, Plaintiff will, if required by this
Honorable Court so to do, post security for reasonable costs
of this action, for approval by the Clerk of the Court; and
C. Plaintiff respectfully demands that this Honorable
Court enter a remedial writ and order disallowing the daily
16
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
18/55
usurpations and intrusions upon the state office of General
Counsel to the University of Alabama System, now occupied
by Defendant R. Cooper Shattuck, the same being suffered by
that office daily, accompanied by unlawful expenditures of
state funds for his salary and expenses and costs attendant
to the usurpation and intrusion upon that office complained
of herein, all in violation ofCode of Ala., 9-14E-9, and
all accomplished at the behest of Defendant Robert Bentley
and Defendant R. Cooper Shattuck while he also occupies the
office of Executive Director of the University of Alabama
Systems Gulf State Park Project, directing employees of
the University of Alabama System to act in concert with him
to receive salaries and payments, or direct salaries and
payment of other sums, all from sources of state funds that
are disallowed by Code of Ala., 9-14E-9.
____________________________________________________________
COUNT THREE
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT THAT CODE OF ALA., 9-14E-1 THROUGH 9-14E-10 WERE REPEALED, PURSUANT TO
9-14E-9 ON JANUARY 1, 2016____________________________________________________________
32. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all preceding
allegations contained in this complaint in support of this
Count Three.
17
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
19/55
33. Due to the injunction and judgment entered by the
United States District Court for the Southern District of
Alabama on February 16, 2016, attached as Exhibit B to
this complaint, no National Resource Damage Assessment funds
have been lawfully received or awarded to the State of
Alabama for the purposes required by Code of Ala., 9-14E-
9, and Restore Act funds have not been lawfully received or
awarded to the State of Alabama for the purposes required by
Code of Ala., 9-14E-9.
34. Pursuant to Code of Ala., 9-14E-9:
If the State of Alabama does not receive or hasnot been awarded any National Resource DamageAssessment funds or Restore Act funds for thepurposes of this chapter by December 31, 2015,this chapter is repealed on January 1,2016.
Wherefore, pursuant to the Alabama Declaratory Judgment
Act, Code of Ala., 66-220 et seq., Rule 57, Alabama Rules
of Civil Procedure, and case law decided by the Supreme
Court of Alabama in Ex parte Chemical Waste Management,
Inc., 929 So.2d 1007, 1013 (Ala. 2005); Zeigler v. Baker,
344 So.2d 761, 763-764 (Ala. 1977); Goode v. Tyler, 237 Ala.
106, 109 (Ala. 1939) Plaintiff respectfully demands that
this Honorable Court judicially declare Code of Ala., 9-
14E-1 through 9-14E-10 were repealed pursuant to Code of
18
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
20/55
Ala., 9-14E-9 on January 1, 2016. Plaintiff respectfully
demands, as further relief pursuant to Code of Ala., 6-6-
222 and 6-6230, and the authorities cited herein, an order
and judgment that Defendants are restrained from the
expenditure of state funds for any of the purposes described
by Code of Ala., 9-14E-1 through 9-14E-10, due to their
repeal pursuant to the above cited provision ofCode of
Ala., 9-14E-9.
s/William J. BaxleyWilliam J. Baxley [email protected]
S/Joel E. DillardJoel E. Dillard [email protected]
s/Elizabeth W. McElroy
Elizabeth W. McElroy [email protected]
BAXLEY, DILLARD, McKNIGHT,JAMES & McELROYPost Office Box 530333Birmingham, AL 35253-0333Telephone: 205.271.1100Telecopier: 205.271.1108
19
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
21/55
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this the 11 day of April,th
2016, a copy of the above and foregoing document was servedon all parties by placing a copy of same in the United
States mail, postage prepaid and properly addressed asfollows:
Robert BentleyOffice of the GovernorState of Alabama600 Dexter AvenueMontgomery, Alabama 36130
Gunter Guy,
Commissioner, Department ofConservation and Natural ResourcesState of Alabama64 North Union StreetMontgomery, Alabama 36130
Luther StrangeAttorney GeneralState of Alabama501 Washington AvenueMontgomery, Alabama 36104
William NewtonFinance DirectorState of Alabama600 Dexter AvenueMontgomery, Alabama 36130
R. Cooper ShattuckUniversity of Alabama SystemSid McDonald Hall500 University Boulevard East
Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35401
s/ Elizabeth W. McElroyOf Counsel
20
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
22/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
23/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
24/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
25/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
26/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
27/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
28/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
29/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
30/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
31/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
32/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
33/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
34/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
35/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
36/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
37/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
38/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
39/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
40/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
41/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
42/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
43/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
44/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
45/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
46/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
47/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
48/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
49/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
50/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
51/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
52/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
53/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
54/55
DOCUMENT 4
-
7/25/2019 Grimsley v Bentley
55/55
DOCUMENT 4