Stinger to remove cranes from port authority

A district court judge has ordered the Lincoln County Port Authority to allow Stinger Welding to remove cranes and other equipment necessary for the operation of the cranes from the port authority property. The ruling comes after months of legal maneuvering about Stinger’s right to possess and use the cranes, and years of dispute about the actual ownership of the cranes.

Stinger’s attorneys filed a motion Jan. 22, 2016, asking Judge Douglas Harkin to enforce a December 2013 order from one of the previous judges, Judge Manley, allowing Stinger to remove cranes and components from the building located on Lincoln County Port Authority property. As part of that order, Stinger posted a $1.4 million bond to ensure no irreparable harm would come from the taking of the cranes.

“Judge Manley’s order directed Stinger to post its voluntary bond of $1.4 million and further directed Lincoln County Port Authority to allow Stinger access to Stinger’s facility in Libby for 90 days from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on weekdays ‘for the purpose of dismantling and removing Stinger’s cranes, after the bond is approved by the court,’” attorney David Cotner wrote in the motion. “In dissolving the temporary restraining order, Judge Manley reasoned that Stinger’s posting a bond in an amount equal to the value of the cranes ‘eliminates any serious question of irreparable harm.’ Judge Manley also concluded that ‘plaintiffs did not show that defendants intend to remove or dispose of the cranes with intent to defraud the plaintiff. The only evidence indicates Stinger wants to be restored to possession of the cranes in order to fulfill contract obligations.’”

Following the issuance of Manley’s order, Stinger began removing the cranes from port authority property, but the move was brought to a halt Jan. 21, 2014, when Stinger’s attorneys filed a motion claiming Stinger was removing part of the building. 

The port authority’s attorney, former Libby City Attorney Richard Allan Payne, responded to Stinger’s motion alleging Stinger’s attorneys misrepresented the company’s need for the cranes and asserted the company was attempting to circumvent the base issue by asking for a ruling on Stinger’s right to take the cranes while delaying the judicial process to determine who actually owns the disputed cranes.

“After misrepresenting an ‘immediate need’ for the cranes at issue in this litigation over two years ago to justify taking them out of state, Stinger Montana now asserts the purported need of a third-party stranger to this case as a basis to remove the cranes remaining in Libby based on this ‘new’ immediate need,” Payne wrote in his response to the motion. “Stinger Montana makes this ‘emergency motion’ a mere two months after it opposed the port’s request to expedite hearing on the competing motions for summary judgment as to the ownership of those same cranes. Thus, Stinger Montana wants the court to let it take the cranes, but it does not want the court to actually determine who owns the cranes. For the reasons described below, the port respectfully suggests that, rather than wade through the complexities of whether there is a need, and what entity has any need, as well as a myriad of other issues, the court instead undertake to finally determine who actually owns the cranes based on the briefing of both parties, which determination both parties agree can be made by the court as a matter of law.”

Cotner characterized Payne’s response as an attempt to obfuscate the issue by misrepresenting the facts of the case.

“Lincoln County Port Authority’s brief is an obvious attempt to ‘muddy the waters’ by setting forth a skewed and untrue version of events in this case,” Cotner wrote. “This is particularly troubling in light of the assignment of this case to the fifth judge to have jurisdiction over this case. Rather than engage in a point-by-point analysis of LCPA’s multiple misrepresentations, Stinger will focus on the sole issue currently before the court – why LCPA has refused to comply with this court’s order directing it to give Stinger access to Stinger’s Libby facility to obtain the remaining components needed to operate the cranes, and for which Stinger posted a $1.4 million bond...

“Two judges have denied LCPA’s request for a preliminary injunction enjoining Stinger from obtaining its cranes, despite LCPA’s questionable strategy of filing multiple actions seeking the same relief and attempt to substitute a judge pending a dispositive ruling where LCPA feared an adverse outcome. LCPA’s strategies have been characterized by Judge Manley as a ‘surprisingly cynical misuse of judicial process in this case’ and described by Judge Wheelis as a ‘strategem born in sleaze.’”

Judge Ed McLean, the latest in a long line of judges to preside over this case, issued his ruling on the matter May 20. He ordered Lincoln County Port Authority to allow Stinger representatives to enter the port property and remove three bridges for a 25-ton crane as well as all electrification, crane rail attachment bolts, pendant controls and other items necessary to operate the cranes in another facility.