Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Litigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City announces dismissal with prejudice of Lecco Properties lawsuit
Summary
Council announced that claims by Lecco Properties LLC against the city and two officials were dismissed with prejudice at the district‑court level; the city's counsel and outside law firm were praised for the outcome.
Get email alerts on the Litigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The mayor announced a significant legal development for the city: claims brought by Lecco Properties LLC against the city of Kaplan, Mayor Mike Clasel and Councilman Michael Renfro have been dismissed with prejudice at the district‑court level.
Mayor Mike Lemoine read a memorandum from the city's outside counsel, which reported a memorandum ruling and judgment that closed the case at the district court, canceled the scheduled jury trial and released city witnesses from subpoenas. The memo noted the plaintiff would have had until April 20, 2026 to appeal but did not do so. The mayor thanked City Attorney Calvin Woodruff and outside counsel for their work; the mayor also acknowledged current and former city employees who provided depositions.
The mayor read from the letter, which thanked the city's risk management team and lawyers and said, "This matter has been closed at the district court level. Our plaintiff will have until April 20th, 2026 to file an appeal." The letter signatory is recorded in the transcript variously as Hunter Williams (outside counsel in the narrative) and as "Hunter O'Riley" in the attached memorandum; the transcript contains inconsistent spellings. The mayor said a dismissal with prejudice means the case is permanently closed to re‑filing on the same claims.
What happens next: the city will monitor the case for any appellate filings and notify the council if the plaintiff files an appeal. No further council action was required at the meeting.
(Reporting note: transcript shows inconsistent spelling of the outside counsel's name in different places in the record; the article reports that discrepancy rather than choosing a single spelling.)

