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. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT