In The United States District Court For the Western District of Oklahoma • CIV-02-324-F
BRICKTOWN 2000, INC. and TAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiffs, DAN RANDOLPH HOGAN, TMK/HOGAN JOINT VENTURE, et. al., Defendants
I. SUMMARY OF THE CASE
Plaintiffs Bricktown 2000, Inc., and Tal Technologies Inc., bring this action claiming that Defendants conspired with each other to tamper with and rig the public bid process to illegally obtain valuable redevelopment rights to South Bricktown, and to defraud Plaintiffs of $200 million business-development rights, and ultimately to gain title to properties acquired with public funds. Bricktown is one of the Oklahoma City Metropolitan Area Projects ("MAPS") that was created as part of a $300,000,000.00 government sponsored initiative, raised with a one-cent sales tax, and approved by the Oklahoma City voters in 1993. To that end, in 1997, a new Redevelopment Plan was devised for South Bricktown, where the City would attract private investors to build sports and entertainment-related facilities, including parking. This action is brought under RICO because Defendants entered into an open-ended scheme to obtain redevelopment rights to South Bricktown. The scheme began in 1996, and continues presently. The scheme was first perpetrated against others, and then was directed at Plaintiffs. Certain accomplices of the Defendants are local public officials who abused their political power in order to manipulate and corrupt an Oklahoma City Trust, the Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Authority, and the Oklahoma City Council which the Plaintiffs designate as the "enterprise" that acted to assure that TMK/Hogan was unfairly and improperly awarded redevelopment rights to South Bricktown. The scheme also consisted of many distinct and separate wrongful acts, such as claiming that Torchmark Corporation ("Torchmark"), an $11 billion public company traded in the New York Stock Exchanged under the symbol "TMK", was a partner in TMK/Hogan when it was not. The financial reports of Torchmark were submitted to public officials as proof of the financial strength of TMK/Hogan and its ability to build a multi-screen cinema complex and develop the entire South Bricktown area. TMK/Hogan was awarded redevelopment rights in part based on Torchmark's financial strength and ability, but the South Bricktown development has yet to be built because TMK/Hogan lacks the financial ability. This is further evidenced by the fact that TMK/Hogan subsequently asked the City of Oklahoma City to provide up to $18 million to finance the construction of a Bass Pro Shop on the development area awarded to TMK/Hogan. Separate wrongful acts include bid rigging, bribing a public official, failure to disclose business dealings with decision makers in response to direct questions, altering a public bid proposal after the deadline expired, tampering with official submissions made by Plaintiffs that were crucial to the award of redevelopment rights, claiming agreements with prospective tenants when none existed, selecting Plaintiffs as a co-redeveloper in Bricktown but refusing to permit Plaintiffs to participate, making false promises to charge low parking rates to visitors to Bricktown but failing to do so, misrepresenting results of official reports from a consultant hired by the city government to justify the improper selection of TMK/Hogan as redeveloper, and paying fees to the city's consultants who helped select the redeveloper. In addition, Defendants also used illegal and fraudulent means to cause the City to condemn Plaintiff's valuable canal-front property and transferring to Defendants (all Defendants except Douglas) for their own use and profits. Because of the Defendants misrepresentations and other wrongful acts, especially that they could finance the development when in reality they were either unwilling or unable to invest their own money in South Bricktown, and their bribery of city officials, this valuable land in South Bricktown sits undeveloped - more than three (3) years past the date TMK/Hogan said it would begin construction of a cinema complex on the property.
II. NATURE OF THE ACTION
Plaintiffs bring this action against the Defendants for engaging in unlawful activities, including racketeering activities, fraud, bribery, bid rigging, anti-competitive and unfair business practices, and for intentionally and maliciously interfering with Plaintiffs' prospective business advantage, and for conspiracy to do the same.
Defendant Dan Randolph Hogan made the majority of Defendants' intentionally fraudulent mailings and electronic broadcasts to Oklahoma officials in support of the Defendants' fraudulent scheme to (i) rig the Oklahoma City public bidding process so as illegally to obtain valuable development rights in the MAP project authorized by Oklahoma City voters in 1993; and in so doing further to (ii) prevent Plaintiffs, despite the manifestly superior qualifications of Plaintiffs and their joint venture partner, The Cordish Company, from being chosen as the City's developer for this project; and finally to (iii) acquire title to publicly acquired properties.
Defendants' scheme employed numerous fraudulent means, including intentionally and fraudulently representing that Defendant TMK/Hogan was backed by the $11 billion Torchmark Corporation, conspiring with both their public official accomplices and other private accomplices to condemn valuable properties belonging to Plaintiff Tal Technologies, Inc. and thereafter to transfer those properties and other publicly acquired properties to Defendants' private use and control.
The unfair, improper and illegal conduct of the Defendants resulted in the loss of Plaintiffs' prospective business relationship with the City of Oklahoma City and in the Defendants gaining the rights to two contracts, one contract for parking development and the second contract for the development of properties along the Oklahoma City MAPS Canal, both on City-owned property in South Bricktown, Oklahoma City, State of Oklahoma. The Plaintiffs allege that Defendants engaged in this type of conduct in another public bid for a contract not including Plaintiffs approximately one year prior to the Contracts which are the subject matter of this litigation. Accordingly, Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants' prior and continued fraudulent and improper conduct is additional evidence of a pattern of racketeering activities. Prior to the initiation of the improper and illegal activities by the Defendants, the Plaintiffs were negotiating with the City of Oklahoma City, and had business opportunities in which they had a reasonable expectation of profit. As an intended and foreseeable result of the Defendants' improper and illegal conduct, these contracts were awarded to Defendant, TMK/Hogan, causing Plaintiffs to suffer damages as a direct and foreseeable result of such actions by the Defendants.
III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
The Court has jurisdiction of the claims herein pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c); 15 U.S.C. § 15(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1331. This civil action arises under the laws of the United States. Jurisdiction is also predicated upon the doctrine of supplemental jurisdiction codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1367. Plaintiffs also allege violations of their rights under Title IX of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970, as amended, 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq.; the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 et seq; 18 U.S.C. § 1341; 18 U.S.C. § 1343; 18 U.S.C. § 201; 31 U.S.C. § 3802; 15 O.S. § 136; 21 O.S. § 421; 21 O.S. § 38 et seq;15 O.S. 136; 79 O.S. § 1 et seq; and Common Law Tort, Conspiracy and Fraud.
Venue is proper under 18 U.S.C. § 1965(a), and 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). Venue is also proper under 15 U.S.C. § 22. A substantial part of Defendants' acts giving rise to Plaintiffs' claims occurred within the judicial district and the subject properties are also situated within the judicial district.
IV. DAMAGES
Base recovery would exceed $200 million, with potential double or triple damages under RICO.
V. FOR MORE INFORMATION
Contact us via e-mail. Pat Callahan at president@aaspo.org. Attorney Peter Joseph at paj@ix.netcom.com. Client Moshe Tal at TK7MOSHE@aol.com.
|