Republic Services responded to the lawsuit filed by Acme Metal and Mayfield Paper that hopes to recover Republic’s surcharges the plaintiffs argued are unauthorized by City of San Angelo ordinance. Representing Republic is Charles “Chip” Babcock of Jackson Walker LLP of Dallas. Babcock is a “big gun” in state legal circles.
Babcock represented Oprah Winfrey, and won, in the Mad Cow Disease lawsuit in Amarillo in the early 2000s. He was also President George W. Bush’s lawyer when Bush was the owner of the Texas Rangers.
Bob Gregory and family of San Angelo, who also own Texas Disposal Systems, own plaintiff Acme Metal. Babcock is no stranger to facing Bob Gregory and Texas Disposal Systems. He represented Waste Management when TDS sued them for defamation in Austin. Babcock lost the case, but managed to strip out all of the monetary damages (over $20 million) in the process.
During the bidding process for a 10-year trash contract in March, Republic’s competitor, Texas Disposal Systems, claimed that Republic Services has been overcharging commercial dumpster customers for fuel and environmental recovery fees for at least 10 years. Law allows only a small amount of the fee, TDS said. The overcharges amounted to approximately 32 percent of the total trash bill. TDS estimated that the cumulative overcharges to San Angelo businesses could be as high as $9.2 million.
Before the trash contract was awarded (and signed) by the City and Republic, Republic issued a statement promising to investigate the suspect fees, and offer a refund if they found themselves to be in violation of ordinance rates.
In a court filing Wednesday, Republic issued a general denial of owing anything at all, at least to the plaintiffs. The response said:
- Plaintiffs’ claims and the relief sought are barred in whole or in part by the applicable statutes of limitations.
- The voluntary payment doctrine precludes Plaintiffs’ claims and the relief sought.
- Plaintiffs’ claims cannot be maintained as a class action on behalf of the putative class alleged in the Petition.
“General denials” like this are not uncommon in these types of cases. Lawyers begin their arguments offering no acceptance of guilt, and then argue their case from that starting point.
In addition to offering Republic’s general denial, Babcock and team petitioned to move the case to federal court on Wednesday. In federal court, the process slows to a snail’s pace and the chances for a successful outcome for TDS and Mayfield is reduced. The next news in this case will be the plaintiffs and defense arguing whether federal court is the proper venue.
For now, at the state level, the lawsuit is “stayed.”
Comments
- Log in or register to post comments
Permalink- Log in or register to post comments
Permalink- Log in or register to post comments
Permalink- Log in or register to post comments
Permalink- Log in or register to post comments
Permalink- Log in or register to post comments
Permalink- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkThere is no slant in this story. It informs the reader of what's going on in this lawsuit.
I'll address your points:
1. Hiring Chip Babcock is news for sleepy 'ol San Angelo, Texas. Lawyers stop what they're doing to go watch Babcock perform in the courtroom. Laypeople may not know who Babcock is. I only highlighted two accomplishments of this outstanding lawyer. You can read the rest about him here: http://www.jw.com/feature/attorney/42/
2. I don't address "why the suit?" because that's not part of this story. We covered that elsewhere. The suit is filed. It's in the works. It's already in the news. If you'd prefer editorializing on "why the suit?" and if anyone really believes that the money will be paid back, I suggest you find some news source who will do that. This article clearly states that Acme is owned by the same people as who owns TDS. Our readers are smart enough to sort it all out.
3. When the city and Republic won't talk to the media, they remove themselves from the conversation. I have called, tried to contact their coporate offices, and even gone to Republic's offices in person. They won't talk. And as long as they won't talk, the reader can draw their own conclusions here as well. That won't stop me from reporting what I know, however. Further, I reprinted the salient parts of the Republic answer to the lawsuit. That's what their legal counsel said, in court. I have nothing to hide.
This article was difficult to phrase correctly. If it were a biased report, I'd report on how what Republic said in their reply to the lawsuit doesn't totally jive with what Republic's PR people are saying about the repaying overcharges. To be fair, I note that in lawsuits like this, usually the opening salvos are standard denials of everything.
Finally, if San Angelo LIVE had not reported what we have on the trash controversy, no one would know a thing about it, except for what the city's information czar wrote for the local paper to reprint. I felt that this issue and contract was important to put out into the arena. And apparently the citizens of San Angelo wanted to have a conversation about it, too.
Joe
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkPost a comment to this article here: