Developer vindicated in case versus land owners

BY JANINE ANDERSON
Journal Times

Friday, April 18, 2008 9:45 PM CDT

RACINE — A local developer was vindicated in circuit court Friday, when a six-person jury ruled in his favor in a lawsuit that pitted him against the owners of the land he was developing in Caledonia.

Legacy Development Co., sued William and Dannie Actkins, saying the couple improperly ended their development agreement, shorting the company of hundreds of thousands of dollars and taking profits that would have gone to help cover costs.

The Actkinses say they ended the contract when John Helding, Legacy’s president, stole their land and transferred ownership of several lots. The Actkinses filed a counterclaim here and also sued Helding in federal court, claiming racial discrimination. William and Dannie Actkins are black.

The Actkinses hired Helding and his company to develop their 8.77-acre parcel into the 20-home Woodland Pines condominium subdivision.

The jury recommended Helding be awarded $540,000 for the breach of contract it found the Actkinses committed, plus $3,000 for their interference with Legacy’s titles to several plots.

Before the jury came in to give the verdict Judge Wayne Marik cautioned the parties and the audience not to visibly react to the verdict, out of respect for the jurors and the judicial process.

After the jury left the room, however, Helding and his supporters celebrated while the Actkinses and their attorney walked out of the courtroom.

“We’ll see you guys in federal court,” said attorney Anne Sulton. “Federal court and appeals court. It’ll be another five years before this is over.”

Sulton told the judge she would be filing motions “in a timely fashion."

"I appreciate the service of the jury, and while I disagree with the verdict, I encourage people who have disputes to use our court system as a place, and a forum, where their grievances may be heard," she said Friday night.

Thomas Binger, Helding’s attorney, said this case was decided by “a very smart jury.”

“This was a hard-working jury that paid close attention to the facts,” he said. “They took good notes and had an astonishing attention to detail.”

Jurors stayed late Thursday evening, he said, probably until about 7:45 p.m., and were back at their deliberations by 9 a.m. Friday morning. The decision came in the afternoon, around 2:30 p.m.

Special Offer: Get 5 Weeks of the Journal Times for $7!