Mesquite, NV Aug. 15, 2018.  Jeffrey Sylvester, attorney for Paradise Canyon LLC (Wolf Creek), has asked that a Clark County District Court judge “not dismiss a frivolous motion to dismiss their case against the Virgin Valley Water District (VVWD)” of Mesquite. (See Opposition to Dismiss Below)
On May 15th the owners of Paradise Canyon Paradise Canyon LLC, filed a civil suit (A-18-774539-B) against the VVWD seeking to halt the Districts restrictive pricing practices on water shares the board purchased from Virgin River water shareholders of the Mesquite Irrigation Company (MIC).
On June 9, Jedidiah Bingham, acting for the VVWD filed a dismissal motion in the Eighth Judicial District, Las Vegas. Sylvester, in his counter motion, argued that VVWD’s Motion to Dismiss was apparently written for “Mesquite Local News,” to arose local animus and to paint Paradis Canyon in a false light.
Sylvester urged the court to decide the issue on its merits, not on a frivolous motion to dismiss. He pointed out that VVWD’s flippant assertions, e.g., that Wolf Creek is “subsidized by the residents of the Virgin Valley and is proceeding in “bad faith are verifiably false. Sylvester contends that their dismissal motion is a libelous work of fiction and should be denied outright.
In the motion, Sylvester said that “currently, Paradise Canyon pays VVWD approximately $43,000 per year for irrigation water and $130,000 per year for drinking water, placing it on VVWD’s Top Ten List of all local businesses for potable water charges.’
The attorney argued that “Instead of celebrating Wolf Creek’s success as a local business the VVWD is demanding a 500% rate hike on Paradise Canyon’s irrigation water (from $250 per share to $1,246)
The heart of the issue is the ability of the VVWD to raise rates to whatever rate it pleases without regard to the duties of good faith and fair dealing.
According to Sylvester, the VVWD is “woefully wrong on its legal arguments, and intentionally misrepresents the facts of their case to paint Paradise Canyon in a false light.
If the motion to dismiss is affirmed by a Judge, Sylvester argues that Paradise Canyon will become the number one ratepayer for potable and non-potable water in the whole area, surpassing the casinos, the School District and even the City of Mesquite.
According to Sylvester, “VVWD fallaciously asserts that “[t]his is a case of a golf course that doesn’t want to pay the going-rate for irrigation shares” and in the same breath avers it is not bound to charge a “going-rate” at all.
Sylvester counters that the VVWD must comply with the duty of good faith and fair dealing attendant to “every” contract in the state of Nevada, and whether VVWD is doing so is a question-of-fact to be decided at trial, not on a motion to dismiss.
Endnote:
[i] Hilton Hotels Corp. v. Butch Lewis Prods., Inc., 107 Nev. 226, 233, 808 P.2d 919, 923 (1991) (“Lewis’s good faith relative to the Hilton–Dynamic Duo contract is a question of fact to be determined by the jury after presentation of all relevant evidence.”).
