ILNews

East Chicago casino case still alive

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A years-long court battle over millions of dollars in East Chicago casino revenue remains alive after a Marion County judge vacated an earlier dismissal of the civil suit and blocked the release of $8 million in disputed funds that had been part of a settlement.

Marion Superior Judge David Shaheed on Thursday issued the latest decision in City of East Chicago and State of Indiana v. East Chicago Second Century Inc., No. 49D01-0504-PL-014394. He agreed with Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller that approximately $8 million in casino-revenue funds should not be released while the litigation is ongoing. He decided July 15 to set aside his earlier ruling in April that had dismissed the suit, because the city and for-profit organization known as Second Century didn’t include the AG in settlement negotiations.

The case dates back more than a decade to the administration of now-convicted former Mayor Robert Pastrick, who set up the casino money and local development agreement with Second Century and similar organizations. But the AG’s office has tried for years to delve deeper into that financial transaction to determine how that money has been spent once received.

In February, Mayor George Pabey announced he had reached a deal with Second Century, a for-profit economic development organization that would redirect $1.5 million in annual casino revenue from Second Century to the city. In return, the city would release its claim to approximately $4 million in payments intended for Second Century that have been delayed since 2005 while the lawsuit was pending.

But Zoeller objected to the settlement because he claims Second Century has not adequately shown how it has spent some $16 million in casino revenue it has received over the years.

The settlement was approved April 8, but Judge Shaheed's latest ruling stops the settlement from proceeding and permits the attorney general to participate in the revived lawsuit.

"From the beginning of the Second Century case, the goal of the Indiana attorney general's office has been to ensure that funds intended to benefit the citizens of East Chicago actually do so," Zoeller said in a statement. "The public needs assurances that these funds are not squandered or diverted back to political cronies or to an administration under investigation for corruption."

Pabey was indicted by federal officials in February on charges he conspired to embezzle city money and unlawfully used city workers for personal projects. His trial is scheduled for September.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. "So we broke with England for the right to "off" our preborn progeny at will, and allow the processing plant doing the dirty deeds (dirt cheap) to profit on the marketing of those "products of conception." I was completely maleducated on our nation's founding, it would seem. (But I know the ACLU is hard at work to remedy that, too.)" Well, you know, we're just following in the footsteps of our founders who raped women, raped slaves, raped children, maimed immigrants, sold children, stole property, broke promises, broke apart families, killed natives... You know, good God fearing down home Christian folk! :/

  2. Who gives a rats behind about all the fluffy ranking nonsense. What students having to pay off debt need to know is that all schools aren't created equal and students from many schools don't have a snowball's chance of getting a decent paying job straight out of law school. Their lowly ranked lawschool won't tell them that though. When schools start honestly (accurately) reporting *those numbers, things will get interesting real quick, and the looks on student's faces will be priceless!

  3. Whilst it may be true that Judges and Justices enjoy such freedom of time and effort, it certainly does not hold true for the average working person. To say that one must 1) take a day or a half day off work every 3 months, 2) gather a list of information including recent photographs, and 3) set up a time that is convenient for the local sheriff or other such office to complete the registry is more than a bit near-sighted. This may be procedural, and hence, in the near-sighted minds of the court, not 'punishment,' but it is in fact 'punishment.' The local sheriffs probably feel a little punished too by the overwork. Registries serve to punish the offender whilst simultaneously providing the public at large with a false sense of security. The false sense of security is dangerous to the public who may not exercise due diligence by thinking there are no offenders in their locale. In fact, the registry only informs them of those who have been convicted.

  4. Unfortunately, the court doesn't understand the difference between ebidta and adjusted ebidta as they clearly got the ruling wrong based on their misunderstanding

  5. A common refrain in the comments on this website comes from people who cannot locate attorneys willing put justice over retainers. At the same time the judiciary threatens to make pro bono work mandatory, seemingly noting the same concern. But what happens to attorneys who have the chumptzah to threatened the legal status quo in Indiana? Ask Gary Welch, ask Paul Ogden, ask me. Speak truth to power, suffer horrendously accordingly. No wonder Hoosier attorneys who want to keep in good graces merely chase the dollars ... the powers that be have no concerns as to those who are ever for sale to the highest bidder ... for those even willing to compromise for $$$ never allow either justice or constitutionality to cause them to stand up to injustice or unconstitutionality. And the bad apples in the Hoosier barrel, like this one, just keep rotting.

ADVERTISEMENT