Before

After

West Michigan News Company

Civil Lawsuit

    While still fighting the affects of restraining orders and being placed on probation, Ms. Hudson and I filed a civil complaint against Mr. Benson and Mr. Kluessendorf for putting a fence on a physical, private road that had been used for over 40 years.

     Additionally, the defendants took a drainage ditch for storm water, filled it in, and planted evergreen trees in what used to carry storm water passed our properties. Defendants did not have an easement to use either Blue Goose Avenue or Mallard Street because prior owners had never complied with the Land Development Act of 1967. We had requested an injunction against their use of the roads to bargain with them to get the fence off the road and open the storm drain.

Before

After

    Water continued to run across their property, so they placed plastic bags and rocks where the water would enter their drain tile under their driveway thereby intentionally diverting storm water off their property onto the properties of the plaintiffs. They attempted to hide this act by placing a planter before their make shift dam so neighbors would not see what they were doing. For purposes of intentional trespass in Michigan, “A direct or immediate invasion for purposes of trespass is that is accomplished by any means that offender knew or reasonably should have known would result in the physical intrusion of the plaintiff’s land.” Adams v Cleveland-Cliffs Iron Co. 237 Mich App 51, 67; 602NW2d 215 (1999)

     Flooding my property to get a storage shed and my garden was not good enough for them, so they placed what they called “landscaping,” which consisted of a wall of large stones right where the storm water comes out of Ms. Hudson’s drain tile under her driveway. This action would cause the water coming down (north) Blue Goose Avenue and turning east on Mallard Street in front of Blanche Hudson’s to backup and flood my house and my garage.

      On March 11, 2014, Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Change of Venue based upon the close connection Pat Foster had as an election auditor during Judge Cronin very close recount after the 2008 General Election in which 53% of the Precincts could not be counted. The Court ruled against our Motion for a Change of Venue and in so doing implied that it could be an impartial judge of the facts placed before it.

       On May 15, 2014, Defendants filed a Motion for Security for Costs and attached a brief in support of that motion. Defendants’ attorney opened in their Introduction with the following statement:

       “For Defendants Tom Benson and John Kluessendorf, life the past four years has been a living nightmare and there is one reason why; Plaintiff Pat Foster, their neighbor.

      Since 2010, Mr. Benson and Mr. Kluessendorf have been forced to endure unrelenting harassment, annoyance, fear for their health and physical safety, and the dejection of realizing that their dreams of peaceful retirement have been usurped and become a daily horror.”

       On June 17, 2014, Plaintiff Pat Foster filed an answer to their motion and brief. On page two of the answer, I stated that their statement was “completely false”, and I stated:

“Karen Wellman, a good friend of mine who was the democratic candidate for Allegan County Commissioner for the Saugatuck/Douglas area in the 2006 General Election, and Chair of the Democratic Club of West Michigan wrote an Affidavit for me after Mr. Benson requested and received an Ex Parte PPO against me on May 4, 2014. Affidavit states: “Thanksgiving of 2010 Pat invited his new neighbors to join us. Pat often includes neighbors in his holiday feast and shares in the harvest from his garden. I have had the opportunity to meet many wonderful Hutchins Lake people at Pat’s gatherings. I remember that evening clearly as Pat was so pleased that it appeared that he had some delightful new neighbors. The new neighbors welcomed Pat’s gestures of friendship and hospitality.”

John Benson and John Kluessendorf at Pat Foster’s Thanksgiving dinner party on November 25, 2010 corroborating Ms Wellman’s affidavit:

    On July 31, 2014, the Court Order stated: “It appears reasonable and proper to this Court, based on the record, to order the Plaintiffs to file a bond with surety in the amount of $30,000 with the Court Clerk pursuant to MCR 2.109. After showing additional untrue statements in the defendants’ brief, we came to the conclusion that this requirement was placed on us in an attempt to force us to drop our civil suit against the defendants by draining us of available cash to continue. As an accountant who has accounted for equity (Equi: Latin for fair) for over 45 years, I realized that this court was not going to judge this case in an impartial way required by a Court of Equity. I needed to go to a higher court to seek justice.

Civil Suit.mp3

   Click above for      audio summary

Home Government Crimes Logical News Judicial Corruption Elections Auditor Intimidation Blog Archives Subscribe