Friday, June 17, 2005 | 9:57 a.m.
The Clark County Aviation Department does not owe the contractor who performed a study on a proposed airport in the Ivanpah Valley any more money for his work, a jury ruled Wednesday.
The eight-member jury ruled 7-1 against Raymond Young, a Princeton-educated engineer and former undersecretary of the federal Transportation Department, who sued the county in June 2002 for unjust enrichment, breach of contract, intentional and negligent misrepresentation.
Young claimed the county stole ideas from within a massive feasibility study on a massive, privately financed cargo hub in the Ivanpah Valley after abruptly terminating a memorandum of understanding they had entered with his company, Hamilton Nevada LLC.
All but one claim -- that of unjust enrichment -- were dismissed in October. Reached this morning, Aviation Director Randy Walker said that, of course, the county was pleased with the verdict.
"I think they made the right decision," he said.
Walker said the county plans to seek reimbursement of its attorney's fees within the next several weeks. William Coulthard and J. Randall Jones, Young's lawyers, were not immediately available for comment this morning.
The end of the agreement effectively came during an August 2001 meeting with Walker, during which time he insisted in front of potential investors that the idea would be for a publicly financed passenger facility.
The abrupt end, which Young had testified consisted of Walker "storming into" the room, embarrassed Young in front of potential investors and cost him most of his inheritance and the proceeds from the sale of his home in New York.
The county offered to settle the case earlier this year for $350,000, an amount estimated to equal what it would cost the Aviation Department to fight the claims, Walker said. Young's attorneys rejected the offer and instead took it before the jury, he added.
"It's not all the costs (of defending against the charges)," Walker said. "It's a fair amount of money."
Walker said he was confident in the county's defense but that he still felt putting the case in a jury's hands was risky.
"Obviously when you go before a jury there's always the perception of risk," he said. "We felt confident the facts were on our side and the jury found that to be the case."
archive
