Hearing moved in Madison County security deposit class action

Amelia Flood Apr. 11, 2011, 5:00am


A Friday hearing was pushed off in a 2010 class action brought by tenants against owners of two apartment complexes in Maryville and Glen Carbon over security deposit interest.

Lead plaintiffs Charese Shadwick and Mike McBride propose to lead a multi-tiered class of past and present tenants against Osborn Homes Inc., Cottonwood Properties, Stonebridge Village LLC, and Kim and Joseph Osborn.

The suit asks for relief under the Illinois Security Deposit Return Act, Security Deposit Interest Act, consumer fraud statutes, and other laws related to contracts and insurance.

The plaintiffs' third amended complaint includes 28 counts.

The plaintiffs are also seeking to add another lead plaintiff, Matthew Shearer, to the suit in a filing dated March 14.

Defendants Cottonwood and Stonebridge as well as the Osborns moved to dismiss the case
on March 7.

Madison County Circuit Judge William Mudge was set to hear motions Friday.

However, the case's docket indicates that the hearing was pushed off.

According to the suit's third amended complaint, the lead plaintiffs and other potential class members were not paid interest on their security deposits despite requests for payment.

The plaintiffs also claim that the defendants did not properly inspect their units after they began and ended their tenancy in them.

The proposed class would be made up of seven sub-sets.

The first set – Class "A" – would be all people living in Illinois from 2000 to its final judgment who were tenants at the complexes in question who were not in default on their leases and did not receive the interest from the security deposits.

Class "B" would be all people living in Illinois from 2005 until the final judgment in the case who lived in the complexes who did not receive the interest as required by the Security Deposit Interest Act.

Class "C" would consist of all people in Illinois who from 2005 to the final judgment were tenants in a complex with five or more units who did not receive their security deposit back or the part they were entitled to within 30 days the end of their tenancy and did not receive paid receipts from the lessor within the time prescribed by law.

Class "D" could be any Illinois resident who from 2005 to the final judgment was entitled a security deposit return within 30 days and did not receive the paid receipts attached to an itemized billing statement.

Class "E" would be made up of all persons from Jan. 1, 2005 until the final judgment that had a month to month lease which did not include disclosures required by the Automatic Contract Renewal Act.

Class "F" would include Illinois residents who lived at a complex of four or more units who did not receive an insurance disclosure statement on their current or former tenancy of the defendants.

Glass "G" would be made up of all Illinois residents who from 2000 to the final judgment were a tenant of the defendants who forfeited their security deposits by not staying for the duration of the lease.

The class action has not been certified to date.

The suit seeks damages in excess of $1.4 million, attorney's fees and other relief.

The Osborns, in their motion to dismiss, call a number of the plaintiffs' claims "tag-along claims."

They argue that all of the complaints lodged in the third amended complaint should be dismissed because they did not own or lease the properties named in the action or receive any of the plaintiffs' security deposits.

They also contend that the plaintiffs fail to state a claim for relief.

The defendants argue other claims contained in the suit are moot and that the plaintiffs have not demonstrated how certain laws were broken.

It is unclear from the case's docket sheet when the next hearing date in the matter will be.

Mudge took over the case from Madison County Circuit Judge Barbara Crowder.

Peter Maag represents the plaintiffs.

David Antognoli represents all of the defendants except Osborn Homes.

No attorney is listed for that defendant.

The case is Madison case number 10-L-1083.

More News