Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, June 18, 1994 TAG: 9406290099
SECTION: CURRENT PAGE: NRV-1 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
SOURCE: STEPHEN FOSTER STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: CHRISTIANSBURG LENGTH: Medium
After VMH Inc. of Christiansburg began building the Tekoa group home, an adjacent land owner filed a property boundary suit against the nonprofit housing corporation.
VMH, whose attorney filed a defense motion in Floyd County Circuit Court on Friday, has countered, claiming that the suit, filed last month, was not grounded in fact or good faith, but "has been brought for the sole purpose of harassment," according to the countersuit.
It is asking for $100,000 in damages, claiming that the motivation behind the boundary line suit constitutes "a willful and malicious perversion of civil process."
Formerly called Virginia Mountain Housing, VMH debated for months last year with local activists who didn't believe the project had been publicized properly. They also contended that the site, in the Possum Hollow section of the county along Virginia 615, was too isolated for the children's safety, and they worried about the nature of the children themselves.
VMH has said it wanted to build the home to house 16 abused, truant and troubled boys and girls from the New River Valley who would otherwise have to be sent to facilities across the state - and far away from their families.
In November the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development awarded VMH a $350,000 loan, and soon after meeting state regulations for a driveway entrance, VMH began construction of the home in April.
Dale Profitt, a Floyd lawyer, last month filed papers for Prices Fork Developers Inc., saying that VMH planned to build a road and bridge over land belonging to his clients. Profitt did not return three phone calls Friday.
"It's simply a matter of, 'Hey guys, get off our land,'" said Ann Alexander, one of the stockholders in Prices Fork Developers, contacted in Charlottesville, where she lives.
The portion of land in dispute includes about 112 feet along the roadside, land on which VMH is building a driveway. If it were to lose the suit, VMH is concerned it would not be able to provide access to the home because state speed and safety regulations might not allow the driveway entrance to be moved farther up the road.
But Harriett Dorsey, VMH's attorney, said she has no doubt that VMH will either win the case or it will be dismissed.
The case should hinge on various deeds describing the property, a survey VMH had done before buying the land and the question of whether a suit should have been brought long before now.
"We have an abundance of documentation and surveys that support" our position, Dorsey said.
Furthermore, VMH's countersuit said Prices Fork Developers "have caused the corporation to bring this action not for the purpose of determining a boundary line, but for the ulterior purpose of preventing VMH from constructing and operating the group home on its property."
The countersuit calls for the boundary line suit to be dismissed and asks for Prices Fork Developers to pay VMH $50,000 in compensatory damages, $50,000 in punitive damages and attorneys fees.
Memo: ***CORRECTION***