Facts

The United States filed its complaint on July 2, 2003, which alleged seven claims for relief, for: violation of 25 U.S.C. Section 415; violation of the BIA's cease and desist order; trespass; ejectment; and three claims for violation of RCRA Section 7003(a), 42 U.S.C. § 6973(a), respectively.

The United States filed its motion for summary judgment based on its First Claim for Relief on July 14, 2006, seeking an order finding that defendants violated 25 U.S.C. Section 415 by failing to obtain a lease approved by the U.S. Department of the Interior before commencing operations on the property at issue, and requesting that a permanent injunction be issued ordering defendants to cease and desist all operations on the property in question and to vacate the property.

On Aug. 7, 2006, the Court granted the permanent injunction, ordering defendants Kim Lawson and Lawson Enterprises "to immediately cease and desist all activities on, and to immediately vacate the land in question. Defendants are ordered to refrain from operating any business on the land unless and until they obtain a lease that has been approved by the Secretary of the Interior."

The United States filed a second motion, seeking summary adjudication on its Third, Fourth and Seventh Claims for Relief on Oct. 13, 2006.

On Nov. 30, 2006, the Court granted the United States' second motion, ruling that the United States had established: the first three elements of its Third Claim (trespass); the first two elements of its Fourth Claim (ejectment); and that defendants violated the unilateral administrative order issued pursuant to Section 7003(a) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), 42 U.S.C. Section 6973(a) Seventh Claim (RCRA violations).

The Court specifically determined that the only issues remaining for trial were: (1) The extent to which the United States was harmed and whether and to what extent defendants' entry onto the site caused the harm (Third Claim for trespass); (2) Whether and to what extent the United States was damaged by defendants' wrongful conduct (Fourth Claim for ejectment); and (3) The appropriate amount of penalties to be assessed, as well as issues regarding clean up of the site (Seventh Claim for RCRA violations). (Order Granting Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Adjudication (Order) dated Nov. 30, 2006 at 13-14.)

The United States agreed to dismiss the Second Claim and the Sixth Claim. (Pretrial Conference Order, lodged Dec. 5, 2006 (PTC)).

On Dec. 19 and 20, 2006, a trial was conducted on the above-referenced issues before the Court.

Default had previously been entered against defendant Torlaw Realty, Inc., a suspended Nevada corporation, on Jan. 7, 2004.

Result

Verdict, $46,962,000

Other Information

The United States was represented by Assistant United States Attorneys Leon W. Weidman, Jonathan B. Klinck, Monica L. Miller and by Special Assistant United States Attorney Letitia D. Moore. Defendant Kim Lawson represented himself in pro per. Defendant Lawson Enterprises, a California general partnership, was not represented. Defense counsel from Best, Best & Kreiger successfully removed themselves as counsel one week prior to trial.

Length

1.5 days