Lawsuit against Nolting dismissed by Judge Weimer

The lawsuit against Village of Bushnell Board of Trustees Chairman Timothy Nolting, brought forth by Emerson “Fal” Calvert, has been dismissed by Judge Derek C. Weimer.

Calvert, who owns the property referred to as the “old lumberyard” in the Village of Bushnell, had initially filed a complaint stating that Nolting had been too aggressive in his efforts to make Calvert clean up the old lumberyard property, forcing Calvert to get rid of some of his personal items out of the fear that Nolting would take everything.

“Plaintiff did get rid of some of his property that he really wanted to keep in his effort to satisfy Mr. Nolting. Plaintiff did find other storage for some of his property under threat, duress and cohersion [sic] in his attempt to quiet Mr. Nolting and prevent him from following through with his threats of cleaning up plaintiff’s property if plaintiff failed to do so. Plaintiff is out thousands of dollars of inventory that he reluctantly got rid of trying to keep Mr. Nolting from taking everything,” the complaint stated.

In an amended complaint filed May 27, 2014, Calvert, represented by attorney William C. Peters, reaffirmed his claims stating that Nolting has “taken actions as chairman of the Village Board of Trustees of Bushnell to threaten the Plaintiff with confiscation of his property”.

“Defendant Nolting has attempted to tow, remove, destroy or otherwise deny the Plaintiff access or ownership of personal property located in or on the aforementioned ‘old lumberyard’ without legal authority thus depriving the Plaintiff of his personal property and the quiet enjoyment of his real estate contrary to law,” the complain stated.

Calvert also focused on the claim that Nolting serving as both a Kimball County Commissioner and a Bushnell village board member is against the law, making his actions as a board member invalid concerning Calvert’s property.

“Plaintiff asserts that any action modifying the Building and Zoning Code of the Village of Bushnell during the time that the Defendant Nolting held both the position of county commissioner of Kimball County and as a board member of the Village Board of Bushnell are invalid and as such there exists no authority for the actions attempted by the Defendants,” the complaint stated.

Calvert had asked for $50,000 in damages from Nolting in the lawsuit along with “an order determining that the Defendant Nolting cannot hold both offices simultaneously and that pursuant to prior Supreme Court decisions in Nebraska that the election to a second elective office vacates the elective office simultaneously held”.

However, after attorney Robert Brenner, representing Nolting, pointed out a few discrepancies with the complaint, particularly the use of the terms “those members of the Village Board of Trustees in Bushnell” and “the Defendant and each of them”, stating that if there is an actual charge against someone else other than Mr. Nolting then they would need to name those individual defendants, whether it be a number of other individuals or a village board as a whole. Mr. Peters asked for 14 days to respond to Brenner’s points after which time Calvert dropped the lawsuit against Nolting, and Judge Weimer officially dismissed the lawsuit on June 20, 2014 without prejudice, meaning that Calvert could file another complaint in the future.

For Nolting, the dismissal is cause for a sigh of relief after months of battling back and forth with Calvert.

“I had a pretty good hunch that was the way it was going to go, but I was really pleased when that’s the way it did finally end. I guess, my only disappointment is I wish it would have gone ahead and gone in front of a judge. But the fact that Mr. Calvert’s lawyer is the one that requested the case be dismissed, I can only assume that he felt confident that there was nothing that he could prosecute for, which Mr. Brenner and I knew that there was nothing there that he could file any charges against. It was all within the law,” Nolting said.

Nolting also states that with the case dismissed, the board can move forward with business as usual and keep enforcing the village ordinances with confidence, including a continued pursuit to get the old lumberyard property cleaned up.

“Legally, we can just pick up where we left off. Mr. Brenner advised me and I concur. We’ll just start the process over. The health board, and I’m on the health board, we’ll bring it up again, and if the health board votes to take it forward then we’ll bring it up to the village board. If the village board is willing to continue the pursuit then we’ll start with a fresh abatement notification,” Nolting said. “We’ll state all of the individual ordinances and state statutes that call for an abatement and we’ll give him the 30 days to act and if it doesn’t happen this time, we’ll just move forward. We won’t keep asking. I think we’ve asked enough over the last seven years. It’s time to act.”

However, as Nolting states, it is not just the old lumberyard property that the village has to be concerned about but that the board will move forward with making sure that all properties fall within the regulations set forth by the board.

“There’s just several old buildings in the community, one in particular which is not just a health hazard it’s a physical danger, the walls are falling in and no one claims ownership for it. That’s the old Bushnell Bar that sits right across the street from the village office. So that’s an area that needs to be cleaned up. There are other properties within the village that have abandoned vehicles,” Nolting said.

Nolting also states that he hopes the decision will send a message to village residents that the board is willing to aggressively pursue getting things cleaned up and taken care of.

“I’m hoping that it gives the community the message that the board is willing to pursue legal action to enforce those ordinances that we’re trying to uphold. And it’s not inexpensive, but some times you’re just going to have to stand up and press the issue in order to get things accomplished,” Nolting said.

For Nolting, the dismissal of the lawsuit gives the board more confidence in moving forward and being proactive with making sure that the village is kept under control and that the village ordinances and state statutes are followed.

“This, I think, gives the village notice that the village board is willing to pursue whatever means are necessary to get those things taken care of. And I think a lot of people take those actions personally, and what I hope that what we as a board can convey to the community is that our asking of particular citizens in the village to remove those hazards is not a personal vendetta, it’s for the benefit of the entire village. And I think that the board will do what they need to do to enforce those statutes,” Nolting said.