Bridgewater File 3

Case: 61CI1:19-cv-00272-a Document #: 18 Filed: 12/10/2019 Page 1 of 4
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF RANKIN COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI
BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S PLAINTIFF

ASSOCIATION, INC., A MISSISSIPPI
NON-PROFIT CORPORATION
V. CAUSE NO. 19-272
RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC.,

DAVID L. LANE, DAVID W. LANE AND JOHN DOE
DEFENDANTS NOS. 1 THROUGH 5 DEFENDANTS
MOTION TO SHOW CAUSE
Plaintiff Bridgewater Owner’s Association, Inc. (“BOA”) respectfully moves the Court
for entry of an order requiring Defendants Ridgway Lane & Associates, David L. Lane and
David W. Lane (collectively, “Ridgway Lane”) to show cause why they should not be held in
contempt for their intentional failure to abide by orders of the Court, including the Temporary
Restraining Order entered on November 12, 2019 [Doc. No. 11], the Modified Temporary
Restraining Order entered on November 19, 2019 [Doc. No. 13], and the Second Modified
Temporary Restraining Order entered on November 27, 2019 [Doc. No. 15] (collectively, the
“Orders”). In support hereof, BOA states as follows:
1. BOA commenced this action by filing its Complaint [Doc. No. 1] on November 6,
2019, seeking recovery from Ridgway Lane of hundreds of thousands of dollars of BOA funds
stolen from BOA accounts.
2. On November 11, 2019, BOA moved for temporary, preliminary and permanent
injunctive relief [Doc. No. 8], including a freeze of Ridgway Lane accounts and property and
other relief.
3. On November 12, 2019, the Court entered a Temporary Restraining Order
freezing Ridgway Lane’s accounts and assets and requiring Ridgway Lane to “immediately
identify” all bank accounts in which they hold an interest and all fidelity bonds, insurance
policies and other insurance instruments that may be responsive to the losses incurred by BOA.
[Doc. No. 11].
4. Thereafter, the Court extended the injunctive relief on the same or similar terms
by entry of orders dated November 19 and 27, 2019. [Docs. Nos. 13 and 15].
5. Despite entry of the Orders, Ridgway Lane has to date failed and refused to
identify all accounts, property and insurance policies, or to take action to immediately and fully
comply with solemn Orders of the Court.
6. Instead, Defendant David W. Lane, through counsel, has identified a single bank
account but has not provided any other information; and David L. Lane, through counsel, has
indicated a willingness to identify property but has not done so as of the date of the filing of the
instant Motion.
7. On information and belief, Defendant David L. Lane’s house remains listed for
sale in violation of the Orders.
8. Defendant David W. Lane quitclaimed real property to his spouse on the day the
first TRO was entered (Ex. 1), and has yet to provide evidence of that property being transferred
back to David W. Lane by his spouse.
9. Ridgway Lane’s failure to fully comply with the Orders has seriously impeded
BOA’s and other victims’ efforts to identify property, accounts and insurance policies that may
exist and be used to address victims’ losses that result from Ridgway Lane’s fraud and theft of
BOA’s funds.
2
10. Civil contempt orders are necessary to enforce a party’s compliance with a court’s
order. Hanshaw v. Hanshaw, 55 So.3d 143, 147 (Miss. 2011)(citing Purvis v. Purvis, 657 So.2d
794, 796 (Miss. 1994)). The court has “wide discretion” in the enforcement of its decrees. Id.
(citing Matthews v. Matthews, 86 So.2d 462 (Miss. 1956)). The court may award the petitioner
for contempt attorney fees incurred in enforcing compliance with the court’s order. Id. (citing
Ladner v. Logan, 857 So.2d 764, 773 (Miss. 2003)). Contempt is “purged” by paying costs and
expenses and complying with the terms of the court’s orders. Common Cause of Miss. v. Smith,
548 So.2d 412, 415 (Miss. 1989).
11. Given indisputable evidence of Ridgway Lane’s failure and refusal to fully
comply with the Orders (by immediately identifying bank accounts and assets and insurance
policies), Ridgway Lane (including Ridgway Lane & Associates, Inc., David L. Lane and David
W. Lane) should be required to show cause why they should not be held in contempt of the
court’s Orders and made to comply with same immediately and pay attorney fees and costs
incurred by BOA in seeking compliance with the Orders.
Wherefore, BOA requests:
a. That Ridgway Lane (including Ridgway Lane & Associates, Inc., David L. Lane and
David W. Lane) be ordered to show cause why they should not be held in contempt of the
court’s Orders and made to comply with same immediately and pay attorney fees and
costs incurred by BOA in seeking compliance with the Orders.
b. That the Court grant BOA any other relief to which it may be entitled under the
circumstances.
Respectfully submitted,
This the 10th day of December, 2019.
3
BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S ASSOCIATION,

INC.
By:s/Roy H. Liddell
Roy H. Liddell (MB # 1252)
Its Attorney
OF COUNSEL:
WELLS MARBLE & HURST, PLLC

300 Concourse Blvd., Suite 200
Ridgeland, MS 39157
P. O. Box 131
Jackson, MS 39205-0131
Telephone: 601-605-6900
Facsimile: 601-605-6901
E-mail: rliddell@wellsmarble.com
Certificate of Service
I hereby certify that on December 10, 2019, I electronically filed the foregoing with the
Clerk of the Court using the MEC system which sent notification of such filing to all counsel of
record.
s/Roy H. Liddell
Roy H. Liddell
#272256
4
BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S ASSOCIATION, INC. PLAINTIFF
VS. CIVIL ACTION NO. 19-272

DAVID L. LANE, AND JOHN DOE
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
COMES NOW, the Defendant, Ridgway, Lane & Associates (hereafter referred to as
Defendant), through counsel, and files this, its Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint, and in support
thereof shows as follows:
FIRST DEFENSE
The Complaint fails to state a claim against the Defendant upon which relief may be
granted and should therefore be dismissed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Mississippi Rules of
Civil Procedure.
And now, having set forth the above defense, but without waiver thereof, the Defendant
responds to the specific numbered paragraphs:
INTRUDUCTION
1. Paragraph 1 of the Complaint appears to require no response from the Defendant.
However, to the extent that a response is required, the Defendant denies the Plaintiff’s allegations
to the extent that the Plaintiff seeks to impose liability upon this Defendant. The Defendant denies
1
that any alleged duty to the Plaintiff has been breached under any law. In all other respects, the
Plaintiff’s allegations are denied.
PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE
2. The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as
to the truth of the Plaintiff’s statements made in Paragraphs 2-3 of the Complaint.
3. The Defendant admits the truth of the Plaintiff’s statement made in Paragraphs 4-5
of the Complaint.
to the truth of the Plaintiff’s statement made in Paragraph 6 of the Complaint.
5. The Defendant does not question the jurisdiction of this Court. However, the
Defendant denies any alleged duty to the Plaintiff has been breached under any law.
6. The Defendant does not question the venue selected by the Plaintiffs. However, the
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
7.. Paragraphs 9-29 of the Complaint appear to require no response from the
Defendant. However, to the extent that a response is required, the Defendant denies the Plaintiff’s
allegations to the extent that the Plaintiff seeks to impose liability upon this Defendant. The
Defendant denies that any alleged duty to the Plaintiff has been breached under any law. In all
other respects, the Plaintiff’s allegations are denied.
COUNT ONE – BREACH OF CONTRACT
8. The Defendant denies the allegations made in paragraphs 30-33 of the Complaint.
COUNT TWO – BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY
2
COUNT THREE – CONVERSION
COUNT FOUR – FRAUD
COUNT FIVE – FRAUD IN THE INDUCEMENT
COUNT SIX – NEGLIGENCE
COUNT SEVEN – GROSS NEGLIGENCE
COUNT EIGHT – UNJUST ENRICHMENT/IMPOSITION OF CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
This unnumbered paragraph of the Complaint appears to require no response from the
allegations to the extent that the Plaintiff seek to impose liability upon this Defendant. The
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, having fully answered the allegations of
Plaintiff’s Complaint and having set forth its defenses thereto, this Defendant moves this Court to
dismiss the Plaintiff’s Complaint with prejudice at Plaintiff’s cost, and for an award of reasonable
attorney fees and expenses against the Plaintiff.
3
This the 10th day of December 2019.
RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC., Defendant
BY: /s/ Mérrida (Buddy) Coxwell

MÉRRIDA (BUDDY) COXWELL
MÉRRIDA (BUDDY) COXWELL (MB# 7782)

COXWELL & ASSOCIATES, PLLC
Post Office Box 1337
Jackson, Mississippi 39215-1337
Telephone: (601) 948-1600
ATTORNEY FOR RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC., DEFENDANT
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that I, Mérrida (Buddy) Coxwell, Counsel for Defendant Ridgway, Lane
& Associates, Inc., do hereby certify that I have this day electronically filed the above and
foregoing Answer with the Clerk of Court using the ECF system, which sent notification of same
to all counsel of record.
This the 9th December 2019.
/s/ Mérrida (Buddy) Coxwell

4
BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S ASSOCIATION, INC. PLAINTIFF
VS. CIVIL ACTION NO. 19-272

DAVID L. LANE, AND JOHN DOE
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
COMES NOW, the Defendant, Ridgway, Lane & Associates (hereafter referred to as
Defendant), through counsel, and files this, its Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint, and in support
thereof shows as follows:
FIRST DEFENSE
The Complaint fails to state a claim against the Defendant upon which relief may be
granted and should therefore be dismissed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Mississippi Rules of
Civil Procedure.
And now, having set forth the above defense, but without waiver thereof, the Defendant
responds to the specific numbered paragraphs:
INTRUDUCTION
1. Paragraph 1 of the Complaint appears to require no response from the Defendant.
However, to the extent that a response is required, the Defendant denies the Plaintiff’s allegations
to the extent that the Plaintiff seeks to impose liability upon this Defendant. The Defendant denies
1
that any alleged duty to the Plaintiff has been breached under any law. In all other respects, the
Plaintiff’s allegations are denied.
PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE
to the truth of the Plaintiff’s statements made in Paragraphs 2-3 of the Complaint.
3. The Defendant admits the truth of the Plaintiff’s statement made in Paragraphs 4-5
of the Complaint.
to the truth of the Plaintiff’s statement made in Paragraph 6 of the Complaint.
5. The Defendant does not question the jurisdiction of this Court. However, the
6. The Defendant does not question the venue selected by the Plaintiffs. However, the
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
7.. Paragraphs 9-29 of the Complaint appear to require no response from the
allegations to the extent that the Plaintiff seeks to impose liability upon this Defendant. The
COUNT ONE – BREACH OF CONTRACT
COUNT TWO – BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY
2
COUNT THREE – CONVERSION
COUNT FOUR – FRAUD
COUNT FIVE – FRAUD IN THE INDUCEMENT
COUNT SIX – NEGLIGENCE
COUNT SEVEN – GROSS NEGLIGENCE
COUNT EIGHT – UNJUST ENRICHMENT/IMPOSITION OF CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
This unnumbered paragraph of the Complaint appears to require no response from the
allegations to the extent that the Plaintiff seek to impose liability upon this Defendant. The
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, having fully answered the allegations of
Plaintiff’s Complaint and having set forth its defenses thereto, this Defendant moves this Court to
dismiss the Plaintiff’s Complaint with prejudice at Plaintiff’s cost, and for an award of reasonable
attorney fees and expenses against the Plaintiff.
3
This the 10th day of December 2019.
RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC., Defendant
BY: /s/ Mérrida (Buddy) Coxwell

MÉRRIDA (BUDDY) COXWELL (MB# 7782)

COXWELL & ASSOCIATES, PLLC
Post Office Box 1337
Jackson, Mississippi 39215-1337
Telephone: (601) 948-1600
ATTORNEY FOR RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC., DEFENDANT
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that I, Mérrida (Buddy) Coxwell, Counsel for Defendant Ridgway, Lane
& Associates, Inc., do hereby certify that I have this day electronically filed the above and
foregoing Answer with the Clerk of Court using the ECF system, which sent notification of same
to all counsel of record.
This the 9th December 2019.
/s/ Mérrida (Buddy) Coxwell

4
BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S PLAINTIFF

ASSOCIATION, INC., A MISSISSIPPI
NON-PROFIT CORPORATION
V. CAUSE NO. 19-272

DAVID L. LANE, DAVID W. LANE AND JOHN DOE
MOTION OF PLAINTIFF BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S ASSOCIATION, INC.

FOR ENTRY OF A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
Pursuant to Miss. R. Civ. P. 65, Plaintiff Bridgewater Owner’s Association, Inc. (“BOA”)
respectfully moves the Court for entry of an order granting temporary, preliminary and,
ultimately, permanent injunctive relief against Defendants herein. In support hereof, BOA states
as follows:
1. BOA filed suit against the Defendants claiming, among other things, conversion
of funds from BOA bank accounts at Community Bank that were held in trust for the benefit of
BOA and intended for use in paying operating expenses and funding capital improvements for
BOA. (See Ex. 1, Affidavit of Cindy Dunbar Verifying Complaint and Ex. 1-A, Complaint.)
2. BOA incorporates herein each of the allegations of its Complaint. (Ex. 1-A).
Temporary Restraining Order and Relief Sought
3. BOA hereby seeks entry of a temporary restraining order under Rule 65(b) and
ultimately preliminary and permanent relief freezing bank accounts and assets of Ridgway, Lane
& Associates, Inc., David L. Lane and David W. Lane, including accounts that are owned and
maintained by them or any of them at Community Bank and at any other financial institution (the
“Accounts”) and real and personal property of Ridgway, Lane & Associates, Inc., David L. Lane
and David W. Lane (“Assets”).
4. BOA specifically asks the Court to restrain, prohibit and preclude movement or
transfer of any Accounts or Assets by Ridgway, Lane & Associates, Inc. and any of its
principals, owners, employees or other related persons or entities pending further order of this
Court, including without limitation David L. Lane and David W. Lane.
5. If movement or transfer of the Accounts and Assets is not restrained, BOA will
suffer irreparable injury in the loss of limited funds necessary to address the loss alleged in
BOA’s Complaint and such loss will have occurred before Defendants can be heard in
opposition.
6. BOA further asks that the Court order Defendants to each immediately identify all
bank accounts in which they hold an interest (including banking institution, account type and
account number) and provide same to counsel for BOA.
7. BOA further asks that the Court order Defendants to each immediately identify
and preserve all fidelity bonds, insurance policies and other insurance instruments that may be
responsive to the losses alleged in the BOA complaint and immediately provide such information
to BOA and its counsel.
8. BOA further asks that the Court order Defendants to preserve all of their financial
records and business records relating to the operation of Ridgway Lane & Associates, Inc. and
not destroy same.
BOA Is Entitled to a TRO and Injunctive Relief
9. Entry of a temporary order is thus necessary to prevent further loss that would
otherwise be likely and inevitable.
2
10. There exists a substantial likelihood that BOA will prevail on the merits of its
Complaint.
11. At least one other homeowners’ association has filed suit alleging the same
wrongdoing and seeking similar relief. (See Bridgewater II Owners Assn., Inc. v. Ridgway Lane
& Associates, Inc. et al.; Civil Action No. 1:19 cv 276-SSR).
12. Other neighborhood associations reportedly have suffered similar loss according
to published reports. See Jackson Jambalaya, “Palisades Plundered” (Nov. 10, 2019) and “Now
Dinsmor HOA Discovers ‘Irregularities’” (Nov. 8, 2019).
13. The threatened injury to BOA in the absence of the relief requested far outweighs
any inconvenience or claimed harm to Defendants that could occur as a result of the granting
relief as requested.
14. Entry of an order granting the relief sought herein is clearly in the public interest.
15. Due to the sensitivity of this matter and the urgency required to protect BOA and
its membership, notice should not be required, but BOA’s undersigned counsel hereby certifies
that he is providing notice of these proceedings and the relief requested to a functioning email
address for David L. Lane, the registered agent for Defendant Ridgway, Lane & Associates, Inc.,
and if advised Defendants are represented by counsel, will notify such counsel in advance of the
hearing hereon.
16. Under the circumstances, the Court has discretion to grant the relief requested and
to act immediately to protect the interests of BOA and its membership and others who may have
been harmed. In the Matter of the Conservatorship of the Estate of Mary Elizabeth Brewer
Jackson, 203 So. 3d 4 (Miss. Ct. App. 2016); Animale Grp., Inc. v. Sunny’s Perfume, Inc., 256 F.
App’x 707 (5th Cir. 2007).
3
Preliminary and Permanent Injunctive Relief
17. BOA incorporates herein its foregoing allegations and requests for relief.
18. BOA asks that upon the granting of temporary relief as sought herein, that the
Court, after notice to Defendants, set this matter for a preliminary injunction hearing as soon as
practicable and grant BOA preliminary injunctive relief on the same terms and ultimately
permanent injunctive relief on the same terms until the merits of this case are resolved.
19. If movement or transfer of the Accounts and Assets is not restrained, BOA will
suffer irreparable injury in the loss of limited funds necessary to address the loss alleged in
BOA’s Complaint and such loss will have occurred before Defendants can be heard in
opposition.
20. BOA seeks any other relief to which it may be entitled under the circumstances.
21. BOA reserves all of its rights as asserted in its Complaint for additional relief.
Wherefore, BOA asks the Court to enter a temporary restraining order, and ultimately a
preliminary and permanent injunction under Rule 65:
a. Freezing bank accounts and assets of Ridgway, Lane & Associates, Inc.,
David L. Lane and David W. Lane, including accounts that are owned and maintained by
them or any of them at Community Bank and at any other financial institution (the
“Accounts”) and real and personal property of Ridgway, Lane & Associates, Inc., David
L. Lane and David W. Lane (“Assets”).
b. Restraining, prohibiting and precluding movement or transfer of any
Accounts or Assets by Ridgway, Lane & Associates, Inc. and any of its principals,
owners, employees or other related persons or entities pending further order of this Court,
including without limitation David L. Lane and David W. Lane.
4
c. Ordering Defendants to each immediately identify all bank accounts in
which they hold an interest (including banking institution, account type and account
number) and provide same to counsel for BOA.
d. Ordering Defendants to each immediately identify and preserve all fidelity
bonds, insurance policies and other insurance instruments that may be responsive to the
losses alleged in the BOA complaint and immediately provide such information to BOA
and its counsel.
e. Ordering Defendants to preserve all of their financial records and business
records relating to the operation of Ridgway Lane & Associates, Inc. and not destroy
same.
f. Granting BOA any related relief to which it may be entitled under the
circumstances.
Dated: November 11, 2019.
BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S ASSOCIATION,

INC.
By:s/Roy H. Liddell
Roy H. Liddell (MB # 1252)
Its Attorney
OF COUNSEL:
WELLS MARBLE & HURST, PLLC

300 Concourse Blvd., Suite 200
Ridgeland, MS 39157
P. O. Box 131
Jackson, MS 39205-0131
Telephone: 601-605-6900
Facsimile: 601-605-6901
E-mail: rliddell@wellsmarble.com
271926
5
Case: 61CI1:19-cv-00272-a Document #: 9-2 Filed: 11/11/2019 Page 1 of 5
EXHIBIT 2

Bridgewater File 3

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Bridgewater File 3

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Case: 61CI1:19-cv-00272-a Document #: 18 Filed: 12/10/2019 Page 1 of 4

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF RANKIN COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S PLAINTIFF

V. CAUSE NO. 19-272

RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC.,

MOTION TO SHOW CAUSE

“Orders”). In support hereof, BOA states as follows:

stolen from BOA accounts.

3. On November 12, 2019, the Court entered a Temporary Restraining Order

[Doc. No. 11].

comply with solemn Orders of the Court.

sale in violation of the Orders.

back to David W. Lane by his spouse.

548 So.2d 412, 415 (Miss. 1989).

incurred by BOA in seeking compliance with the Orders.

Wherefore, BOA requests:

costs incurred by BOA in seeking compliance with the Orders.

This the 10th day of December, 2019.

BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S ASSOCIATION,

WELLS MARBLE & HURST, PLLC

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF RANKIN COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S ASSOCIATION, INC. PLAINTIFF

VS. CIVIL ACTION NO. 19-272

RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC.,

thereof shows as follows:

responds to the specific numbered paragraphs:

1. Paragraph 1 of the Complaint appears to require no response from the Defendant.

Plaintiff’s allegations are denied.

PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as

4. The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as

to the truth of the Plaintiff’s statement made in Paragraph 6 of the Complaint.

other respects, the Plaintiff’s allegations are denied.

COUNT ONE – BREACH OF CONTRACT

COUNT TWO – BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY

COUNT THREE – CONVERSION

COUNT FOUR – FRAUD

COUNT FIVE – FRAUD IN THE INDUCEMENT

COUNT SIX – NEGLIGENCE

COUNT SEVEN – GROSS NEGLIGENCE

COUNT EIGHT – UNJUST ENRICHMENT/IMPOSITION OF CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

other respects, the Plaintiff’s allegations are denied.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, having fully answered the allegations of

attorney fees and expenses against the Plaintiff.

This the 10th day of December 2019.

RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC., Defendant

BY: /s/ Mérrida (Buddy) Coxwell

MÉRRIDA (BUDDY) COXWELL (MB# 7782)

ATTORNEY FOR RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC., DEFENDANT

to all counsel of record.

This the 9th December 2019.

/s/ Mérrida (Buddy) Coxwell

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF RANKIN COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S ASSOCIATION, INC. PLAINTIFF

VS. CIVIL ACTION NO. 19-272

RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC.,

thereof shows as follows:

responds to the specific numbered paragraphs:

1. Paragraph 1 of the Complaint appears to require no response from the Defendant.

Plaintiff’s allegations are denied.

PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as

4. The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as