LAWRENCE CO. – Another lawsuit has been filed against one of the most-sued scammers in Lawrence, former Bridgeport city alderman Timothy Akers.
Akers has been sued half a dozen times in Lawrence in the past decade for failure to provide goods or services (amongst various businesses he’s “owned”) as promised, but unfortunately there’s not been a lot of publicity about it, likely because local media shies away from telling the truth about businesses when they’re sued (because the county overall is losing population – including taxable income – and local media has a freakout about saying anything “bad” about those involved in the exodus) and because they don’t understand that even if that were a valid concern, Akers is a former public official and as such, his doings require a higher level of scrutiny (since public officials in Lawrence, by virtue of the mass exodus or perhaps something in the nitrate-laden water, have a strong tendency to be corrupt).
As such, because people aren’t warned adequately about Akers and his business schemes, they continue to fall for it, regardless of what his business-du-jour might be.
This is the second lawsuit filed against Akers this year, the previous being a Small Claims case filed by Joseph and Mariah Morse on February 20.
Because Akers didn’t show up in court on April 5, the Morses received a default judgment of $40, plus $165 in court costs/filing fees.
Naturally, when it came time to discover assets, Akers than appeared and, channeling his inner craphouse lawyer, objected to the citation (which is issued to demand the presence of a person and evidence of all their finances to determine repayment), noting that a non-party signed it, and that the wrong judgment amount had been entered on it.
As a result of that, the citation was stricken, and the Morses had to try it again, having to go to the trouble and expense to get another citation issued to Akers, this on July 5. There’s no upcoming court date set.
There is, however, an upcoming court date for Akers when it comes to the most recent filing, which was done on June 22 by Steve Cavender.
And this one isn’t a small claims case….it’s an LM (law case involving monetary demand) under a Forcible Entry and Detainer claim, meaning that somehow, Akers has managed to not pay his rent at his hovel at 644 Church Street in Bridgeport, out of which he’s been operating (for lack of a better expression) a used-appliance business, this in violation of Bridgeport city ordinances about having junk on the premises of residences and businesses.
Akers has never been issued citations for that, whereas others in the city of Bridgeport have been, since he set up shop.
Cavender claims in his FE&D suit that Akers owes $10,144 in rent and/or damages, along with court costs ($132 so far). Notices of appearance, required by law in these circumstances, were sent to both parties a couple of days after the filing was made, June 25, as it appeared both were representing themselves and hadn’t involved attorneys.
In keeping with the weirdness that surrounds Akers, however, a note on file made by Judge Mark Shaner (who has been the one with the unenviable task of tending to all of Akers’ misdeeds over the years) dated June 28, addressed a filing – in a handwritten motion – by Akers that got the initial hearing date of June 28 continued to July 13…without signature of a judge in order to get it continued.
“It is unclear to the court how the hearing set June 28, 2018, was continued to July 13, 2018, but insofar as Plaintiff (Cavender) has no objection, the motion to continue filed by Defendant (Akers) is granted and hearing set for July 13, 2018, at 10 a.m.,” Shaner wrote.
Apparently Cavender had no problem with that, as there’s nothing on file to indicate such.
Whether this is valid as a reason for continuance, however, is subject to willing suspension of disbelief…and whether anyone wants to suspend it.
Akers wrote, “I am requesting a continuance for this case. I have acquired a new job and am scheduled to be out of town/state for training for the week and day this is set for. Continued until July 13th at 10 a.m. A filed copy of this has been hand delivered to Steve Cavender on 6/22/18.”
This was chicken-scratched on a piece of yellow legal pad note paper. Another scratched-out piece of yellow note paper, set up to resemble a legal filing (with Second circuit, case number, parties and styling “Defendant’s Motion of Continuance,” bore the body copy: “And the court having heard and considered having heard both parties and being otherwise advised in the premises, it is hereupon ordered and adjudged that said motion be, and the same is hereby done and ordered at” and is followed by the appropriate “lines,” left blank for dates and signatures – including a judge’s – toward the bottom of the page.
The lines were blank; no judge’s signature appeared, no date was entered, and there is no file-stamp on it….so Akers’ earlier assertion that a “filed copy” had been hand-delivered was inaccurate, as there is no “filed copy” without a file-stamp.
Because the litigants are acting without attorneys, it’s likely no one caught that; however, lying in court documents, especially as it pertains to court procedures, is punishable as a crime under law.
And in fact, the only file-stamped item in the case was a Summons to each party to appear at 9 a.m. on June 28, which further delegitimizes Akers’ claim.
It would be awesome if someone were to make a complaint about such apparent deception, but thus far, no one has…and Akers managed to get a couple more weeks out of his rental after the stunt.
On Friday, July 13, both Akers and Cavender appeared, and an agreed eviction order was entered by Shaner, providing that Cavender will have possession of the property commencing July 17 at noon.
Shaner also set a hearing on back rent and damages to the premises on August 24.
What damages Akers is alleged to have caused to the premises has not been listed in the filings.
Whether Cavender will actually get any rent, however, is the big question. As the average house rental in Lawrence goes for about $600, and if the total of $10,144 represents only rent (and not damages; it’s not specified, so it’s difficult to say), that would mean that Akers may not have paid rent for about a year and maybe more.
The sad part is that this is all-too-frequently the case for many landlords in Lawrence; and very rarely do they ever collect on their filings for back rent. Generally, all that occurs is eviction.
And the super-sad part is that very rarely does anyone get to collect against Akers, even when they win a judgment, because his various “businesses” usually have a half-life of about six months or less, usually lose money…and leave scammed people in their wake, most of whom don’t have the resources to go about attempting to collect and recoup their losses.