Litigation continues after 2009 sewage flood

Clark County

Discussion

January 27, 2012

By DAVID A. MANN David.Mann@newsandtribune.com The News and Tribune Fri Jan 27, 2012, 04:35 AM EST

JEFFERSONVILLE — A group of residents that filed a lawsuit against Jeffersonville after their homes were flooded with sewage in 2009 are asking the Jeffersonville City Council for help.

Specifically, the group is concerned with the way the city’s insurance company is defending the case, saying its attorney is using an ordinance out of context.

For now, the council and the administration are mum on the issue.

According to the plaintiffs, the sewer backup occurred on Springdale Drive on Aug. 4, 2009 — the day of a historic rainfall. The city was replacing an 8-inch sewer line with a 12-inch sewer line. Before the most substantial part of that storm hit, sewage began overflowing into people’s homes “causing a lot of damage,” said Mitchele J. Harlan, a plaintiff.

“It’s bad enough if you get some rainwater in your basement; this was sewage,” he said.

Some families had condoms or feminine napkins wash into their basements.

“That kind of added to the disgust,” he said.

Stacey K. Newton, the attorney litigating the case on behalf of the city’s insurer, did not return phone call requests for comment on this story.

Harlan, a practicing attorney in Jeffersonville, said the city is defending the case based on the fact that a 100-year rain occurred Aug. 4.

“The rain happened after [the backup],” Harlan said. “We really feel like that was a nonissue.”

A second argument being employed by Newton is an ordinance that calls for back-flow preventers on the lateral lines that run from the homes to the sewer pipe outside.

“The [ordinance], like any code, it should only apply to new builds or remodels,” Harlan said.

The ordinance doesn’t require residents to dig up their sewer laterals and install back-flow preventers, he said.

Motions for summary judgement based on those arguments have been filed in Clark County Circuit Court No. 3. Additionally, several residents came before the city council Monday night asking for help on the issue.

“It’s been two years,” said Dennis Langford, one of the residents. “We’ve lost a lot. Any help would be appreciated.”

On the advice of its attorney, the council didn’t respond to the pleas during the meeting. An email request for comment on the subject was met with the same response.

“The Springdale Drive issue is currently being litigated in court,” said Council attorney Scott Lewis. “Because it is pending litigation, it is the policy of the city council not to comment on or to discuss any city matters that are currently in court proceedings.”

Les Merkley, attorney for the city administration, authored a similar response.