As class counsel and staff recover from illness, Maag Holdings LLC requests an extension of time to notify the public of preliminary approval of a class settlement against Wood River in a suit alleging the city violated the constitutional rights of residents by failing to properly inform them of grass cutting liens.
Maag Holdings filed a motion for extension of notice period on Aug. 26 through attorney Shari Murphy, seeking an additional 14 days in which to mail notices.
The motion states that the court previously ordered that any objections to the final approval of the class action settlement or requests for exclusion to be submitted by Aug. 31.
“That due to class counsel and staff being ill since the entry of the July 8 order, the notice was posted on the City of Wood River’s website for public view, but the notice was not mailed by first class mail to the legal address of record for the licensed properties,” the motion states.
Maag Holdings previously filed a joint motion for preliminary approval of the settlement in February.
Madison County Circuit Judge Chris Threlkeld certified the class action settlement on July 8. The class is described as “all citizens of Wood River, Illinois that had a lien(s) recorded in the land record against their parcel(s) by City of Wood River and was not served personally or by certified mail with a copy of said purported lien(s) that was recorded in the land records against their parcel(s).”
A final approval hearing had been scheduled for Sept. 17 at 9 a.m.
According to a class action settlement agreement and release, Wood River “generally denies” the allegations that grass cutting liens were recorded without being properly served. However, the parties “determined that, rather than incur the expense and inconvenience of the lawsuit, and in order to resolve the dispute, they prefer to reach a negotiated settlement.”
The motion for approval of the settlement states that the parties have agreed to a class action settlement requiring Wood River to ensure that grass cutting liens are either personally served or by certified mail.
“The parties desire to avoid the further expense of litigation and to settle and voluntarily compromise any and all claims or causes of action between them, and that have arisen or that may arise in the future …” the motion states.
The settlement request includes a payment of $5,000 in attorney’s fees and costs.
“This amount will cover the cost of mailing notice, costs of suit and any class counsel attorney fee. These proposed payments and this settlement are fair and adequate when considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the value of the prospective relief sought,” the motion states.
Maag Holdings also requests an unspecified “substantial benefit to the individual class members, who will receive a significant future benefit.”
The plaintiff wrote that a substantial benefit is warranted because it is “unlikely that the individual class members were aware of the existence of failure of City of Wood River to serve grass cutting liens during the class period.”
Maag Holdings LLC filed the complaint on Aug. 14, 2018. An amended complaint was filed April 30, 2019, against the City of Wood River, alleging the defendant recorded removal cost liens for grass cutting without serving them personally or by certified mail.
The City of Wood River previously filed a combined motion to dismiss through attorney John Gilbert of Sandberg Phoenix & von Gontard PC in Edwardsville.
The motion stated that the grass-cutting lien was placed on the Wood River property under the previous owner "who apparently failed to pay."
The defendant argued that even if the lien notification did violate state statute, "as a matter of law those actions were not and could not be malicious activity by this defendant directed against plaintiff."
The motion stated that the Maag Holdings specifically did not purchase its property until March 31, 2018, meaning the lien could not have slandered the plaintiff's title before it held a title to the property.
"Furthermore, because the lawn mowing and all of the lien filing took place when the property was owned by another, plaintiff could not have sustained any damages," the motion stated.
"Plaintiff is seeking to recover for activities and actions which began more than five years before the filing of plaintiff's complaint and all of the allegedly technically deficient liens for grass cutting were prepared and filed when the property was owned by another entity which plaintiff described in the complaint as either Earthly Interiors Inc. or Earthly Interiors Inc.," the motion stated.
Madison County Circuit Court case number 18-L-1039