The opening rounds in a long-standing dispute over construction of home built north of Ketchum for actor Tom Hanks were fired in Blaine County 5th District Court in Hailey on Tuesday morning.
The attorney for plaintiff Storey Construction of Ketchum claimed total victory while the attorney for Hanks and others named as defendants in a lawsuit said the hearing was only an opening skirmish and the final outcome is still in question.
"The plain English is that this is the first chapter in a long story," said Los Angeles attorney John D. Hanover, who is representing Hanks, his wife, Rita Wilson, and Lily Reeves, the trustee of the Sun Valley Trust, the entity that technically owns the Hanks' home.
"Gary Storey is extremely pleased with the outcome of today's hearing," said Ketchum attorney Miles Stanislaw, who is representing Storey Construction. "All the motions made by Storey were granted, and all the motions made by the defendant were denied."
At dispute are alleged construction defects in a home built for Hanks and Wilson in 2002. This is not the first battle. A prior a�bitration proceeding?between the parties was concluded in 2004, and Storey was awarded $1.85 million in unpaid contract balance, interest and legal fees.
Hanks et al. had alleged that Storey breached the construction contract by performing substandard work.
The Storey-Hanks war was renewed last November when Hanks, Wilson and Sun Valley Trust filed a new request for arbitration with the American Arbitration Association, alleging that new defects had been discovered.
In response, Storey filed a lawsuit in 5th District Court alleging "abuse of process" and seeking a stay on the new arbitration process.
At Tuesday's hearing, Judge Robert J. Elgee considered four motions filed by the litigants.
One, he denied a motion filed by Hanks et al. to seal the court files in the case.
Stanislaw had the following comment: "The judge said he was not sealing any files and that the public had absolute right to know what was in the court file."
Two, the judge confirmed the decision made in the 2004 arbitration. The motion was filed by Storey. Hanover said the money had already been paid so confirmation was a moot point.
Three, Elgee put a stay on the new arbitration process. The ruling was in accord with a motion filed by Storey.
Four, part one, Elgee denied a Hanks' et al. motion to dismiss the "abusive process" claim made by Storey in his lawsuit. Part two, Elgee declined to remove Hanks and Wilson from the lawsuit. Hanks and Wilson alleged in the motion that they are not the owners of the house. The judge, however, put a stay on the motion, meaning that it can be considered later.
So what comes next?
"The next step is a court hearing to determine if the defects on arbitration number two are the same as the defects covered in arbitration number one," said Hanover.
"If the judge decides that the defects in arbitration number two are not the same as what was alleged in arbitration number one, then he will send us to the arbitrator for a full hearing on those defects," Hanover said. "As far as I'm concerned, there are no winners or losers yet. There will be a winner or a loser at the next hearing."
Stanislaw, on the other hand, said his client is confident of ultimate victory.
"Mr. Storey looks forward to getting this nightmare behind him," Stanislaw said.
Tom Hanks
