Mayor City Council Lawsuit File - 1

Case: 25CH1:22-cv-00281 Document #: 10 Filed: 03/16/2022 Page 1 of 5
IN THE CHANCERY COURT OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
CHOKWE A. LUMUMBA, IN HIS OFFICIAL

CAPACITY AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF JACKSON PETITIONER
V. CAUSE NO. 2022-281
THE CITY COUNCIL OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI RESPONDENT
MOTION FOR EMERGENCY HEARING AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
COMES NOW, The City Council of Jackson, Mississippi (“Respondent”), by and
through its attorney of record, Deshun T. Martin of MARTIN AND MARTIN, P.A., and files
this Motion for Emergency Hearing and Injunctive Relief and shows unto the Court as follows:
REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY HEARING AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
I. FACTS
On or about late September 2021, the City of Jackson (“the City”) agreed and entered
into a six (6) month contract with Waste Management, LLC for garbage and waste collection.
The contract was entered into to afford the City adequate time to undergo a new Request for
Proposal (RFP) process, select a vendor for long term garbage and waste collection for the City,
and enter into a new service contract by April 1, 2022. At the conclusion of the RFP review, the
Mayor of the City, Chokwe A. Lumumba (“Petitioner”), recommended a garbage and waste
collection contract with a company for a two (2) day service week. Respondent voted to oppose
Petitioner’s recommendation and proposed contract with said company at two (2) separate
meetings.
On or about the middle of February 2022, Petitioner declared an “emergency” due to the
upcoming deadline and signed an emergency one (1) year contract with the aforementioned
company. On March 8, 2022, at a Special City Council meeting, Respondent voted in favor of an
1
Order discontinuing Petitioner’s “emergency”. Furthermore, Respondent voted to oppose the
emergency contract with said company twice (2) in that same meeting. Respondent was advised
by Public Works Attorney Terry Williamson during the meeting that the administration had
given said company Notice to Proceed. Attorney Williamson did not inform Respondent the day
the notice was given. On March 9, 2022, Petitioner filed an Emergency Complaint for
Declaratory Judgment in the First Judicial District of the Hinds County Chancery Court
regarding the emergency contract with said company.
It is pertinent to emphasize that the subject company that Petitioner entered into a
contract with for garbage and waste collection HAS NEVER RECEIVED A MAJORITY
VOTE FROM THE CITY COUNCIL OF JACKSON. Therefore, Petitioner must be made to
cease and desist forthwith. Respondent would and will not approve a contract with subject
company identified by Petitioner. At this juncture, Respondent requests that this Court enter an
injunction expressly prohibiting Petitioner from going forth with this contact, which in and on its
face violates and circumvents Mississippi law. Respondent on behalf the City has now voted
twice (2) to cancel and / or void this contract on numerous occasions.
II. LAW
The City admits that this Court has jurisdiction to determine the rights and obligations of
Petitioner and Respondent concerning the dispute set forth in Petitioner’s complaint and
Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 57 properly applies to these facts and circumstances.
Jackson, Mississippi operates under a mayor-council form of government. Miss. Code § 21-8-1,
et seq. As the governing authority, Petitioner and Respondent are required by law to provide for
the collection of garbage for the City. Miss. Code §17-17-5(1) (Rev.2019). Failure to satisfy that
obligation deprives the City residents of a necessary service that is vital to their health and
2
welfare. It also subjects the City, Petitioner, and Respondent to a civil penalty of not more than
twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) for each violation of §17-17-5(1). Miss. Code § 17-17-
29(1) (Rev.2003). See generally Miss. Code § 17-17-3(u) (Rev.1994).
Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 57(a) authorizes courts to order an expedited hearing
of an action for declaratory judgment. Mississippi trial courts have the inherent power to control
their dockets to ensure justice is timely done. Harris v. Fort Worth Steel & Machinery Co., 440
So. 2d 292, 296 (Miss.1983) (“[t]rial courts have inherent authority and duty to control their
dockets for the orderly disposal of business.”) Betts v. Washington Mut. Finance Grp., LLC, No.
2:02CV122-P-B, 2006 WL 2404627, at *1 (N.D. Miss. Aug. 18, 2006) (noting federal courts
have “inherent power… to manage their own affairs so as to archive the orderly and expeditions
disposition of cases”).
A short time between the filing of the Complaint, the filing of responsive pleadings, and
an expedited hearing will not prejudice Petitioner or Respondent. Mississippi courts have
ordered an expedited hearing within three days of a declaratory action being filed and
consolidated. In re: Validation of $7,800,000 Combined Utility System Revenue Band, ect., 465
So. 2d 1003, 1011 (Miss.1985).
In this matter, Petitioner entered into an alleged “emergency contract” (said contract is
attached, incorporated, and included herein as Exhibit “A”) with the subject company. However,
Petitioner and the subject company violated the terms of said contract. Section 10.2 of the
contract provides, “upon execution of this agreement, the parties agree that should City Council
fail to approve the need for continuing the local emergency or fail to authorize compensation for
this Agreement and performance under this Agreement is suspended or terminated.”
Additionally, Section 2 (Term) of the contract provides, “Within fourteen (14) days of receipt of
3
a fully executed Agreement that has been approved by the City Council or otherwise authorized
by a Court of Competent jurisdiction, the City of Jackson shall issue a Notice to Proceed.”
NONE of the aforementioned occurred in favor of Petitioner. AGAIN, SAID COMPANY
HAS NEVER RECEIVED A MAJORITY VOTE FROM THE CITY COUNCIL OF
JACKSON. NEVER. There have been numerous votes by Respondent opposing the contract.
Furthermore, Respondent never approved Petitioner’s request to enter into the “emergency
contract.”
In accordance with the foregoing, this Court should declare that Respondent has the sole
legislative rights, duties, and obligations in the City of Jackson, Mississippi. Moreover,
Respondent’s votes and power can neither be usurped nor escheated to anybody, especially when
there is no emergency.
Respectfully submitted, this the 16th day of March 2022.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI
/s/ Deshun T. Martin___________________________

DESHUN T. MARTIN, MSB #101526
OF COUNSEL:
DESHUN T. MARTIN, MSB# 101526

MARTIN AND MARTIN, P.A.
Attorneys & Counselors
228 East Capitol Street
Jackson, Mississippi 39201
Telephone: (601) 355-0955
Facsimile: (601) 355-0957
E-mail: [email protected]
Attorney for Respondent
4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Deshun T. Martin, do hereby certify that I have this day electronically filed the foregoing
document with the Clerk of the Court utilizing the MEC system, which sent notification to all
counsel of record.
This the 16th day of March 2022.
/s/ Deshun T. Martin________________

OF COUNSEL:

Telephone: (601) 355-0955
Facsimile: (601) 355-0957
5
IN THE CHANCERY COURT OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
CHOKWE A. LUMUMBA, IN HIS OFFICIAL

CAPACITY AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF JACKSON PETITIONER
V. CAUSE NO. 2022-281
THE CITY COUNCIL OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI RESPONDENT
ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES OF

COME NOW, Respondent, The City Council of Jackson, Mississippi (“CCJ”), by and
through counsel, and file this, its Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Emergency Complaint for
Declaratory Judgment [1] filed herein and in support thereof, would respectfully show unto the
Court the following, to-wit:
ANSWER
1. Admitted.
2. Admitted.
3. Admitted.
4. Admitted.
5. Admitted.
6. Admitted.
7. Admitted.
8. Admitted.
9. Admitted.
10. Admitted.
1
11. Denied as stated.
15. Denied as stated - this includes 15(a) through 15(o) collectively.
16. Denied as stated - this includes 16(a) through 16(h) collectively.
17. Denied.
18. Denied – this includes 18(a) through 18(c) individually and collectively.
19. The CCJ denies allegations in unnumbered paragraph beginning with “WHEREFORE”.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
FIRST DEFENSE
The Complaint fails to state a claim in which relief can be granted. Therefore, the Complaint
should be dismissed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure.
SECOND DEFENSE
Petitioner lacks standing to bring some, or all, of the claims contained in the Complaint.
THIRD DEFENSE
Petitioner has failed to exhaust the available administrative remedies for some, or all, of its claims.
FOURTH DEFENSE
There is insufficiency of process on Respondent.
FIFTH DEFENSE
There is insufficiency of service of process on Respondent.
2
SIXTH DEFENSE
This Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Respondent.
SEVENTH DEFENSE
This Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction of this matter.
EIGHTH DEFENSE
The claims asserted in this cause of action are barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
NINTH DEFENSE
Respondent specifically deny any and all allegations of the Complaint not hereinbefore
specifically admitted regardless of paragraph number, or letter, or lack thereof.
TENTH DEFENSE
Respondent asserts all defenses available pursuant to Rule 12(b) of the Mississippi Rules of Civil
Procedure.
ELEVENTH DEFENSE
Respondent reserves all other defenses available to it pursuant to any Mississippi statute, or
regulation.
Respectfully submitted, this the 14th day of March 2022.
/s/ Deshun T. Martin___________________________

OF COUNSEL:

3
Telephone: (601) 355-0955

Facsimile: (601) 355-0957
4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Deshun T. Martin, do hereby certify that I have this day electronically filed the foregoing
document with the Clerk of the Court utilizing the MEC system, which sent notification to all
counsel of record.
This the 14th day of March 2022.
/s/ Deshun T. Martin________________

OF COUNSEL:

Telephone: (601) 355-0955
Facsimile: (601) 355-0957
5

Mayor City Council Lawsuit File - 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mayor City Council Lawsuit File - 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mayor City Council Lawsuit File - 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case: 25CH1:22-cv-00281 Document #: 10 Filed: 03/16/2022 Page 1 of 5

IN THE CHANCERY COURT OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

CHOKWE A. LUMUMBA, IN HIS OFFICIAL

V. CAUSE NO. 2022-281

THE CITY COUNCIL OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI RESPONDENT

MOTION FOR EMERGENCY HEARING AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

COMES NOW, The City Council of Jackson, Mississippi (“Respondent”), by and

REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY HEARING AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Order discontinuing Petitioner’s “emergency”. Furthermore, Respondent voted to oppose the

regarding the emergency contract with said company.

twice (2) to cancel and / or void this contract on numerous occasions.

29(1) (Rev.2003). See generally Miss. Code § 17-17-3(u) (Rev.1994).

So. 2d 1003, 1011 (Miss.1985).

this Agreement and performance under this Agreement is suspended or terminated.”

NONE of the aforementioned occurred in favor of Petitioner. AGAIN, SAID COMPANY

HAS NEVER RECEIVED A MAJORITY VOTE FROM THE CITY COUNCIL OF

Respectfully submitted, this the 16th day of March 2022.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI

/s/ Deshun T. Martin___________________________

DESHUN T. MARTIN, MSB# 101526

This the 16th day of March 2022.

/s/ Deshun T. Martin________________

DESHUN T. MARTIN, MSB# 101526

IN THE CHANCERY COURT OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

CHOKWE A. LUMUMBA, IN HIS OFFICIAL

V. CAUSE NO. 2022-281

THE CITY COUNCIL OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI RESPONDENT

ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES OF

Court the following, to-wit:

11. Denied as stated.

12. Denied as stated.

13. Denied as stated.

14. Denied as stated.

15. Denied as stated - this includes 15(a) through 15(o) collectively.

16. Denied as stated - this includes 16(a) through 16(h) collectively.

There is insufficiency of process on Respondent.

There is insufficiency of service of process on Respondent.

This Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Respondent.

This Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction of this matter.

specifically admitted regardless of paragraph number, or letter, or lack thereof.

Respectfully submitted, this the 14th day of March 2022.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI

/s/ Deshun T. Martin___________________________

DESHUN T. MARTIN, MSB# 101526

Telephone: (601) 355-0955

This the 14th day of March 2022.

/s/ Deshun T. Martin________________

DESHUN T. MARTIN, MSB# 101526

You might also like