Van Weelden Files Petition Against Gordy and Rouw

Mahaska County Board of Supervisors October 2010

Mahaska County Board of Supervisors in October 2010. (left to right: Auditor Kay Swanson, Lawrence Rouw, Henry Van Weelden and Greg Gordy.

Oskaloosa, Iowa – A civil suit petition was filed on Tuesday against Mahaska County Supervisor Greg Gordy and former Mahaska County Supervisor Lawrence Rouw. The allegations come from Henry ‘Willie’ Van Weelden and his attorneys and contains five counts.

The Plaintiffs are demanding a jury trial for all issues, and the petition was filled in Mahaska County District Court by Matt Moore. Moore was unable to comment on the pending litigation any further than the filed documents.

A call to Greg Gordy was not immediately returned, and Lawrence Rouw was just becoming aware of the allegations and couldn’t comment about them at the time of publication.

Henry W. Van Weelden and for his Petition at Law and Jury Demand against Defendants, Gregory Gordy and Lawrence Rouw, states to the Court as follows:

The document then outlines the allegations to the defendants in the case. The first 18 outline allegations common to all counts, such as place of residence, defendants’ forgoing communications regarding the Plantiff (Van Weelden) were false and defamatory including defamatory per se.

Count I: Slander By Defendant Gordy

19. The Plaintiff repleads the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 18 as though such allegations were set forth herein in their entirety.

20. Defendant Gordy’s orally communicated allegations regarding the Plaintiff include, but are not limited to, allegations that the Plaintiff illegally, fraudulently, and deceitfully signed and/or tampered with Mahaska County Supervisor documents and/or illegally, fraudulently, and deceitfully committted theft by obtaining property (e.g. Mahaska County Health Benefits) for his wife, Bonnie Van Weelden.

21. Defendant Gordy communicated the forgoing allegations regarding Plaintiff to the Mahaska County Attorney’s Office, the Iowa Department of Criminal Investigation, the Iowa Attorney General’s Office, under a sworn oath to a Mahaska County Jury and to various third parties.

22. Defendant Gordy’s false and defamatory statements and communications regarding the Plaintiff were a proximate cause of damages to the Plaintiff.

23. Defendants’ forgoing false and defamatory statements and communications were made maliciously and in bad faith.

24. Plaintiff is entitled to an award of punitive damages for the malicious conduct engaged in by the Defendant Gordy.

WHEREFORE Plaintiff respectfully prays for judgement against Defendant Gregory Gordy for compensatory and punitive damages in an amount to be determined by the jury and for the interest and costs as allowed by law.

Count II: Slander By Defendant Rouw

25. The Plaintiff repleads the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 24 as though such allegations were set forth herein in their entirety.

26. Defendant Rouw’s orally communicated allegations regarding the Plaintiff include, but are not limited to, allegations that the Plaintiff illegally, fraudulently, and deceitfully signed and/or tampered with Mahaska County Supervisor documents and/or illegally, fraudulently, and deceitfully committted theft by obtaining property (e.g. Mahaska County Health Benefits) for his wife, Bonnie Van Weelden.

27. Defendant Gordy communicated the forgoing allegations regarding Plaintiff to the Mahaska County Attorney’s Office, the Iowa Department of Criminal Investigation, the Iowa Attorney General’s Office, under a sworn oath to a Mahaska County Jury and to various third parties.

28. Defendant Rouw’s false and defamatory statements and communications regarding the Plaintiff were a proximate cause of damages to the Plaintiff.

29. Defendants’ forgoing false and defamatory statements and communications were made maliciously and in bad faith.

30. Plaintiff is entitled to an award of punitive damages for the malicious conduct engaged in by the Defendant Gordy.

WHEREFORE Plaintiff respectfully prays for judgement against Defendant Lawrence Rouw for compensatory and punitive damages in an amount to be determined by the jury and for the interest and costs as allowed by law.

Count III: Malicious Prosecution By Defendant Rouw

31. The Plaintiff repleads the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 30 as though such allegations were set forth herein in their entirety.

32. On or about January 30, 2012, the state of Iowa prosecuted Plaintiff in State of Iowa v. Henry W. Van Weelden, FRCR63130 (the “Criminal Case”).

33. The Criminal Case was, in its entirety, instigated and/or procured by Defendant Rouw.

34. The Criminal Case terminated in Plaintiff’s acquittal.

35. There was lack of or want of probably cause in the Criminal Case.

36. There was malice in the prosecution of the Criminal Case, in that, the Criminal Case was based upon Defendant Rouw’s false and intentionally misleading information and sworn testimony against the Plaintiff.

37. The Plaintiff suffered damages, including “special injury”, and said damages and “special injury” were proximately caused by Defendant Rouw’s actions.

WHEREFORE Plaintiff respectfully prays for judgement against Defendant Lawrence Rouw for compensatory and punitive damages in an amount to be determined by the jury and for the interest and costs as allowed by law.

Count IV: Malicious Prosecution By Defendant Gordy

38. The Plaintiff repleads the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 37 as though such allegations were set forth herein in their entirety.

39. On or about January 30, 2012, the state of Iowa prosecuted Plaintiff in State of Iowa v. Henry W. Van Weelden, FRCR63130 (the “Criminal Case”).

40. The Criminal Case was, in its entirety, instigated and/or procured by Defendant Gordy.

41. The Criminal Case terminated in Plaintiff’s acquittal.

42. There was lack of or want of probably cause in the Criminal Case.

43. There was malice in the prosecution of the Criminal Case, in that, the Criminal Case was based upon Defendant Gordy’s false and intentionally misleading information and sworn testimony against the Plaintiff.

44. The Plaintiff suffered damages, including “special injury”, and said damages and “special injury” were proximately caused by Defendant Gordy’s actions.

WHEREFORE Plaintiff respectfully prays for judgement against Defendant Gregory Gordy for compensatory and punitive damages in an amount to be determined by the jury and for the interest and costs as allowed by law.

Count V: Concert Of Action

45. The Plaintiff repleads the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 44 as though such allegations were set forth herein in their entirety.

46. At all times relevant herein, Defendants Rouw and Gordy facilitated each other’s conduct and acted in concert with each other, adding and abetting each other in common design in the acts, actions, conduct and omissions against the Plaintiff.

47. At all times, relevant herein, Defendant Rouw’s and Defendant Gordy’s conduct constituted willful, wanton, and malicious conduct against the Plaintiff and, by their mutual conduct, Defendants provided each other with substantial assistance and/or encouragement in their aforementioned conduct against the Plaintiff (by aiding and abetting).

48. At all times relevant herein, each Defendant’s own conduct, separately considered, by assisting the other Defendant, constituted willful, wanton, and malicious conduct toward the Plaintiff.

49. Defendant Rouw’s conduct specifically directed at the Plaintiff was willful, wanton, and intentional.

50. Defendant Gordy’s conduct specifically directed at the Plaintiff was willful, wanton, and intentional.

51. Each Defendant’s conduct was the proximate cause of the Plaintiff’s damages.

WHEREFORE Plaintiff respectfully prays for judgement against Defendant Lawrence Rouw and Defendant Gregory Gordy for compensatory and punitive damages in an amount to be determined by a jury and for the interest and costs as allowed by law.

All allegations made in this case were done so in a civil lawsuit filing, and are being made by the Plaintiff Henry ‘Willie’ Van Weelden and his attorneys.

 

Comments

comments

Posted by on Jan 23 2014. Filed under Local News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.

Comments are closed

Search Archive

Search by Date
Search by Category
Search with Google
Log in | Copyright by Oskaloosa News