TVA ST - Knoxville News Sentinel

More documents

Recommendations

Info

deems just and proper, as well as Attorneys fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1988 (The Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Awards Act of 1976). State Claims PENDANT STATE CLAIMS Plaintiffs re-allege paragraphs 1-7 of Count 1 “Federal Claims,” regarding jurisdiction, venue and Defendants wrongful actions under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and hereby incorporates them herein as fully as if copied verbatim. A. That on or about December 22, 2008, in Roane County, Tennessee, a retention pond, filled with ash, heavy metals, including but not limited to “a high level of arsenic” surrounded by or retained by an earthen dyke, collapsed, and poured profusely into the nearby residential community destroying thousands of acres. The retention pond was owned, operated, and supervised by the Tennessee Valley Authority. The full impact of the breach resulted in a spill of approximately 5.4 Millions cubic yards of ash, heavy metals, contaminates, surged over the collapsed dam onto adjacent properties. As a result of the breach, real property, possible health issues, as exemplified by recent dead fish, exist. As such, by and through Counsels, Plaintiffs file this Complaint and in support of this Complaint would allege: A1. That TVA, its directors, supervisors, agents and supporting staff owed a duty to the citizens near or adjacent to the area to supervise, inspect, and control the stability, safety and efficiency of the earthen dam containing millions of cubic yards of coal-ash in a sludge. A2. That agency officials, including but not limited to the Board of Directors for TVA, the CEO of TVA, other officers and executives, on site supervisors and other agents, failed to properly design, inspect, monitor and maintain the retention pond dikes, their initial design and current stability and knew or should have known, of the dangers of failure, breach or collapse of the structures. No preventative or remedial or corrective measures were taken by Defendants, despite their knowledge of the risks posed to health and public safety by the unsafe earth berm supportive structure. A3. The Defendants were negligent in designing, constructing, maintaining and inspecting the retention pond and its supporting structures. A4. The Defendants were negligent in failing to warn surrounding residents and property owners of the inherent dangers of the retention pond and its supporting structures. A5. The breach and failure of the dike [support structures in general] surrounding the retention pond constitutes negligence per se. It should not have happened. Climate conditions in the area were reasonably foreseeable and predictable, and It was reasonably foreseeable to the Defendants that the structures might and could collapse, causing major damage, and proper actions were not taken to
prevent this occurrence. A6. Defendants, in the exercise of due diligence, knew or should have known of the failure of similar structures at other venues and the consequences of a failure of the structures supporting the retention pond. Other, safer retention measures were commercially available to the Defendants, but they failed to implement and utilize such alternative measures. A7. As a result of the negligence of Defendants, your Plaintiffs suffered property damage, diminution of property value, loss of ingress and egress to their properties for commercial purposes, potential future health issues, pain and suffering, lost income, the loss of the ability to enjoy life. All of these damages, among others, occurred as a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants. A8. Plaintiff reserves the right to file other state claims and federal claims within the limitations of actions for the state of Tennessee and the United States of America PREMISES CONSIDERED, YOUR PLAINTIFFS PRAY: 1. That Process issue and be served on the Defendants, and each of them, and that they be required to appear and answer or otherwise plead within the time and in the manner prescribed by law, else judgment by default be taken against them. 2. For a trial by a jury of 12 persons. 3. That upon a hearing, the Plaintiffs be awarded the sum of $15,000,000.00 for compensatory damages. 4. For punitive damages as allowed by law in the amount of One Hundred and Fifty Million Dollars. 5. For such other further and general and beneficial relief that this Court deems just and proper. Respectfully submitted, this the ____ day of December, 2008. ____________________________ Michael Ritter, attorney at law BPR #012229 1670 Oak Ridge Turnpike Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 [865] 482-7734 ____________________________ Stephen A. Irving, attorney at law BPR #5794
Page 1 and 2: 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR ROANE CO
Page 3: 2. Acting under color of law and pu

TVA ST - Knoxville News Sentinel

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?