IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LOGAN COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA Jay Lawrence Smith, an individual Plaintiff, Civil Action No,_\% COS Honorable Raamie Barker, in his capacity as judge the interim Mayor of the town of Chapmanville, and ‘The Town of Chapmanville, a municipal corporation, Defendants COMPLAINT FOF DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF Now comes the Plaintiff, Jay Lawrence Smith, who states as follows: PARTIES gag ates at u 1. Jay Lawrence Smith (“Smith”) isa resident of Hurricane, Putnam County, West Virginia. 2. Smiths a free-lance legal researcher, and journalist whose principal place of business is in South Charleston, Kanawha County, West Virginia 3. Defendant Raamie Barker (“Barker”) is a resident of Chapmanville, Logan County, West Virginia and is, at all times relevant hereto, the interim mayor of the town of Chapmanville. 4. Barker was appointed Chapmanville’s mayor in August 2016, and continues to serve in that capacity.5. The town of Chapmanville (“town”) is a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the state of West Virginia. Along with an elected city council, and recorder, Barker is responsible for the management of the city’s operations/employees including, but not limited, a police department, 6. As the conduct complained of, and as more particularly set forth herein, occurred in Logan County, this matter is properly venued with this Court. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 7. Smith restates the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1-6. 8. On or about Monday, March 5, 2018, Smith sent an omnibus Freedom of Information ‘Act (“FOIA”) request to Barker via facsimile transmission at 1:42 p.m. to the town’s office at 68 Boise St. 9. Inhis request, Smith asked the Defendants make available the following: A. The terms of the settlement in Gary Price v. the West Virginia State Police, et. al, (Kanawha Circuit Court case number 12-C-1467) and Mark Hatcher v. the town of Chapmanville, et. al. (Logan Circuit Court, case number 15-C-193).B. The legal fees, and expenses incurred in Jane Doe, et. al. v. the Logan County Sheriff's Department, et. al. (U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia , case number 2: 09-cv-990) and Benny James May v. the Chapmanville Police Department, et. al. (Logan Cireuit Court, case number 12-C-344). C. The salary, and employment histories of Allen Browning (“Browning”), Matthew Dingess (“Dingess“), [First Name Unknown] Miller (“Miller”) and Nick Tucker (“Tucker”). D. The completed reports into disciplinary actions taken against the aforementioned individuals. E. The loss-run report on the town’s insurance carrier from Jan. 1, 2001 thru Dec. 31,2017 10. The town, Browning, Dingess, Miller and Tucker were either named as a co- defendant or identified in one of more of the aforementioned civil actions. 11. A copy of Smith’s March 5 FOIA request, with accompanying fax cover sheet and confirmation, is attached as Exhibit “A”, 12. Though W. Va. Code § 29B gives a records custodian five business days to respond toa FOIA request, the defendants via Robert B. Kuenzel (“Kuenzel”), a Chapmanville attorney, answered it the same day,21. Though it fell on a Saturday, neither Defendants, nor any of their agents, posted any details about Smith’s FOIA request to the WVSoS database on or subsequent to March 10, 22. On or about Monday, March 19, Smith replied to Kuenzel’s response. 23, In his letter, which was sent via facsimile transmission at 4:05 p.m., Smith encouraged Kuenzel to reconsider his answer in light of the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals’ (“Supreme Court”) opinions in Daily Gazette Co., Inc. v. Withrow, 177 W. Va. 110, 350 S. E. 2d 738 (1986) and Daily Gazette Co. v. Smithers, 752 8.E. 2d 603 (2013) 24, Citing how W. Va. Code § 298 was to be “liberally construed”, the Supreme Court in Withrow determined a records custodian was obligated to make available for public inspection documents related to lawsuit settlements even if they were not in physical possession of them. 25. Also, citing its decisions in Daily Gazette Co., Inc. v. Committee on Legal Ethies, 174 W. Va. 361, 326 8. B.2d 707 (1984) and Daily Gazette Co., Inc. v. West Virginia Board of Medicine, 177 W. Va. 316, 352 S. 'd 66 (1986), the Supreme Court held in Smithers that completed investigations into disciplinary complaints filed against West Virginia State Police officers are public record. 26. A copy of Smith’s March 19 letter is attached as Exhibit “C”. 27. On or about Monday, March 26, Kuenzel answered Smith’s letter. In his response ‘transmitted via email only at 10:07 a.m., Kuenzel thanked Smith for the legal references, but was “unpersuaded the information requested is discoverable through a Freedom of Information Act request.”13. In his response transmitted via email only at 5:46 p.m., Kuenzel directed Smith to the West Virginia Board of Risk and Insurance Management (“BRIM”) in Charleston for information on the civil suits, and the loss-run report. 14. Also, he acknowledged Browning was currently employed as the town’s police chief, and Miller and Tucker were at one time employed as police officers. 15. Furthermore, despite the fact he was identified in the Hatcher suit as a “Special ‘Chapmanville police officer”, and assisted in a custodial interrogation of Hatcher on or about Dec. 14, 2013 after he was arrested for allegedly battering Tucker, Kuenzel averred Dingess was never employed by the town, 16. Citing the exemptions in W. Va. Code § 29B-1-4(a)(2) and (20), Kuenzel, acting on the Defendants' behalf, denied Smith’s request for Browning's, Miller’s and Tucker’s salary, employment and disciplinary histories. 17. A copy of Kuenzel’s March 5 answer is attached as Exhibit “B.” 18, W. Va. Code § 29B-1-3(f) and -3a(a) requires a records custodians to notify the West Virginia Secretary of State’s (WVSoS”) Office of FOIA requests they receive, and their response by entering the information on a database WVSoS maintains. 19. Pursuant to a Rule promulgated by WVSoS a “public body must enter the required information on the database by the tenth day of the month following completion of the request.” 20. Since defendants via Kuenzel answered Smith's request on March 5, they were obligated to post details of it to the WVSoS database by March 10.28. A copy of Kuenzel’s letter is attached as Exhibit “D”. 29. As with his first, the Defendants were obligated to post details about Smith's second FOIA request to the WVSoS database. The deadline for entry was Tuesday, April 10 30. As of the filing of instant suit, neither Defendants, nor any of their agents, posted any details about Smith's FOIA request to the WVSoS database. 31. The refusal by the Defendants to release the information Smith first requested on March 5, and report their response to it, and his March 19 follow-up request to WVSoS as required by W. Va. Code§ 29B-1-3(f) and -3a(a) has prompted the filing of the instant suit. ARGUMENTS 32. Smith restates the allegations in paragraphs 1-31 33. W. Va. Code § 29B-1-3(1) specifically states: “Every person has a right to inspect or copy any public record of a public body in this State, except as otherwise expressly provided by section four [29B-1-4] of this article.” 34 Regarding his request for the settlements, legal fees and expenses in the four civil actions, and the town’s loss-run report, the Defendants have failed to cite a reason why he cannot have that information. Instead, they have resorted to an old Logan County favorite by referring him to another public body - in this case BRIM - so as delay, and potentially deny, Smith’s effort to obtain the requested information.35. Though Defendants have cited § 29B-1-4(a)(2) and (20) as a reason to deny Smith's Fequest for Browning's, Dingess', Miller’s and Tucker’s salary, employment and disciplinary histories, their position in untenable. 36. The salaries, job titles and descriptions of public employees, including police officers, are public record. 37. Prior to his March 5 request, Smith has made requests to other municipalities throughout West Virginia for the disciplinary histories of specified police officers. 38. These include the cities of New Cumberland (the county seat of Hancock County), Huntington (the county seat of Cabell County) and Charleston (the county seat of Kanawha County and the state capital). They have recognized the Supreme Court’s opinion in Smithers as good law, and provided Smith the information he requested. 39. A recording Smith made reviewing documents the city of Huntington made available in response to a FOIA request on the completed disciplinary reports into four current or former police officers can be found on YouTube at https://youtu.be/z72LQCcIXNU. 40. The Defendants have deliberately, maliciously, and intentionally failed to release the information Smith requested. 41. As such, Defendants have not only demonstrated themselves to be incompetent, but also derelict in their duties. 42. Also, their gross misconduct has created an additional expense to the citizens of Chapmanville through unnecessary litigation.43. Smith’s interest in this action outweighs any arguments for non-disclosure. Moreover, the information requested is public. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff prays that this Court: 1. declare that the Defendants’ refusal to disclose the records requested by Smith is unlawful; 2. declare that the disciplinary histories of law enforcement officers employed by political subdivisions to include municipal corporations, including, but not limited to, those of Defendant town are public record consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion in Smithers. 3. grant injunctive relief enjoining Defendants from withholding records without Justification, and order production, at Defendants’ cost, to Smith of records improperly withheld; 4. grant injunctive relief compelling Defendants to post details to the WVSoS FOIA database about Smith’s FOIA requests including the instant suit‘s final outcome; 5. grant a permanent injunction requiring the Defendants to undergo training for better understanding of W. Va. Code § 29B, and implement a plan for more timely, and accurate responses to FOIA requests; 6. grant a permanent injunction requiring Defendants, in accordance with W. Va. Code § 29B, as amended in 2015 by H.B. 2636, to establish a “reasonable fee” for duplication of records made with Defendants’ devices not to exceed $.05/page.7. grant injunctive relieve enjoining Defendants from enforcing any policy, implied or express, prohibiting anyone from using his or her own device to duplicate and/or make a recording of documents in the Defendants’ possession; 9. award Smith his costs, and reasonable attomey fees - if applicable - incurred in this action, as required by W. Va. Code § 29B-1-7; and 10. grant Smith such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper. mith Prose 5312 MacCorkle Ave., S.W. #238 South Charleston, WV 25309 (681) 233-3293 mslmediainc@yahoo.com STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA COUNTY OF PUTNAM ‘The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _|4{ day of. Apel. 2012 "moor by Day Lawcence Smncth a, See Si) Sas My commission expires__ lajadjaoat ___ Notary % lie i ~5 March 2018 Raamie Barker, mayor Town of Chapmanville 983 N. Main St. . P.O. Box 426 Chapmanville, WV 25508 Dear Mayor Barker: Pursuant to the West Virginia Freedom of Information Act (W. Va. Code 29B-1- 4et. seq.), I request access to the following: I. The settlement reached in the following civil suits: A. Gary Price v. the West Virginia State Police, et. al. (Kanawha Circuit Court, case number 12-C-1467). B. Mark Hatcher v. the town of Chapmanville et. al. (Logan Circuit Court, case number 15-C-193). Information shall include, but not be limited to the following: 1. The release of claims signed by the parties. 2. The payout made by the town either through its general revenue fund or a third party. 3. The deductible paid to the town’s insurance carrier. 4. The legal fees, and expenses incurred by the lawyers/law firms representing the town, and related co-defendants. II. The expenses incurred in the following civil suits: A. Jane Doe, et. al. v, the Logan County Sheriff's Dept., et. al. (U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, case number 2: 09-cv-990). B. Benny James May v. the Chapmanville Police Dept., et.al. (Logan Circuit Court, case number 12-C-344) Information shall include but not be limited to the following: 1. The deductible paid to the town’s insurance carrier. 2. The legal fees, and expenses incurred by the lawyers/law firms representing the town, and related co-defendants,Il. The salary, and employment history of the following current and/or former employees: A. Browning, Allen B. Dingess, Matthew C. Miller, [FNU] D. Tucker, Nick Information shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 1. Beginning employment date. 2. Beginning salary. 3. Beginning title. 4. Current salary, if applicable. 5. Current title, if applicable. 6. Final employment date, if applicable. 7. Final salary, if applicable. 8. Final title, if applicable. 9. Duty assignments during employment. 10. Commendations, and citations awarded during employment. IV. The disciplinary history of the aforementioned employees. Information shall ‘include, but not be limited to, the following: A, The total number of inquires opened during their employment. B. The completed reports into said inquiries. V. The loss run report on town’s insurance carrier from Jan. 1, 2007 thru Dec, 31,2017. As required by the Act, I expect your response within five business days. If you chose to deny all or part of my request, please cite the specific part of the Code for your denial. Once the information is ready, I can be contacted at either the telephone number or addresses listed below. I thank you, Mayor Barker, for taking the time to field my request, and look forward to your reply. Sinc Lay J. Smith5312 MacCorkle Ave., S.W. #238 South Charleston, WV 25309 (681) 233-3293 (24-hour phone/fax) mslmediaine@yahoo.com Sent via faxMSL Media Enterprises 5312 MacCorkle Ave., SW. 1238 South Charteston, WW 25309 (681) 233.3293 ‘Same as above /nttp://www.linkedin.com/in/lismithwy ‘msimediainc@yahoo.com Fax Transmittal Form _ es To: Town of Chapmanville From: Lawrence J. Smith Name: Raamie Barker, mayor Date Sent: 03/05/2018 ce: Phone: (304) 885-4582 Number of Pages: 04 Fax: (304) 885-8478 - Omnibus Freedom of Information Act request - Litigation-related documentsHP Officejet Pro 8610 Series Fax Log for Lawrence J. Smith (304) 397-6075 Mar 05 2018 2:14PM Last Transaction Date Time Type Station 1D Duration Pages Result Digital Fax Mor§ 2:12PM — FaxSent 13048558478 142004 oK NAloft mepeeamasen sean a ous aeanury ams !nups:irman yanoo,comvneo/tymessageysMid=|aid—YeetvabbYbtLog. NG a ‘Town of Chapmanville FO Nora, Moons ae ae row: “Rober Kuen ob@kimstaw co 1: ‘asinedabeyhoo cont metre shoo com> Ce “Robert Kuan Fee 4x8 ‘tached be response fo your FOIA recueet.tyeuhave nyo ques eas fel oe to cekat me. Robert 8. Kuenae Mensa! Law PLLE PO. sox cor 5 Aare Sret ‘Chapman, W 25508-0607, 3043104263 ftlepbone). Socanraree (eon 3043104264 face) wonuhuanzeiw.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: Tha eal ressage om haw ffs of Kuen Law, PLLC, iso” see lhe tended veces) se may cotsn corer ar hegedrtomaten. Any wrnerzd ievew, ee, dau, eration ot cer Sasumranan ae goed tenes es he on Sertaned tere ity ponies yous ee mended expe of ts inal evsape, peaee cotaet Ne bs he woe estoy a cope he oi message 4114/2018 4-10 ANKUENZEL LAw, PLLC 36 ADAMS STREET P.0, BOX 607 CHAPMANViLLE, WV 25508-0607 304.310.4263 TELEPHONE. 304.310.4264 FACSIMILE wonw-kuenzellaw.com Lawrence J. Smith MSL Media Enterprises 5312 MacCorkle Ave., SW, #238 South Charleston, WV 25309 RE: Dear Mr. Smith: ‘Town of Chapmanville FOIA Ingui March 5, 2018 Via Electronic Delivery Only: mslmediainc@yahoo.com Roweer B, KUENZEL rob@kuenzellaw.com JAMES A. MEADE alex@kuenzellaw.com As counsel for the Town of Chapmanville, I have been provided a copy of your Freedom. of Information Request dated March 5, 2018. In response to said request, Inote the following: 1. Settlements: a Gary Price v. WV State Police, et al i, This request should be made directly to WV Board of Risk and Insurance Management, 1124 Smith Street, Suite 4300, Charleston, WV 25301 b. Mark Hatcher v. Town of Chapmanville, et al i ‘This request should be made directly to WV Board of Risk and Insurance ‘Management, 1124 Smith Street, Suite 4300, Charleston, WV 25301 2. Litigation expenses: a. Jane Doe et al v. Logan County Sheriff's Dept. i, This request should be made directly to WV Board of Risk and Insurance Management, 1124 Smith Street, Suite 4300, Charleston, WV 25301 b. Benny James May v. Chapmanville Police Dept. i, This request should be made directly to WV Board of Risk and Insurance Management, 1124 Smith Street, Suite 4300, Charleston, WV 25301Lawrence Smith FOIA Request Page Two (2) Salary and employment history: a Allen Browning i, Currently employed as Chief of Police ii, Any other additional information is exempt from disclosure in accordance with West Virginia Code §29B-1-4(a)(2) and West Virginia Code §29B-1- 4(a(21) b. Matthew Dingess i, Nevera Chapmanville employee ¢. Derrick Miller i. Previously employed as patrolman ii, Any other additional information is exempt from disclosure in accordance with West Virginia Code §29B-1-4(a)(2) and West Virginia Code §29B-1- 4(@21) d. Nick Tucker i Previously employed as patrolman ii, Any other additional information is exempt from disclosure in accordance with West Virginia Code §29B-1-4(a)(2) and West Virginia Code §29B-1- A(a)(21) Disciplinary history of above employees: a. This information is exempt from disclosure in accordance with West Virginia Code §29B-1-4(a\2) and West Virginia Code §29B-1-4(a)(21) Loss report of Town’s insurance carrier: a. This request should be made directly to WV Board of Risk and Insurance Management, 1124 Smith Street, Suite 4300, Charleston, WV 25301 If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. Iam, Very truly yours, Robert B Kuenzel Robert B. Kuenzel“ Mt 19 March 2018 Robert B. Kuenzel, Esq. Kuenzel Law, PLLC 36Adams St. P.O. Box 607 Chapmanville, WV 25508 Dear Mr. Kuenzel: T'm in receipt of your March 5 response to my omnibus Freedom of Information Act request made earlier in the day to the town of Chapmanville for documents related to four civil actions it and/or its employees were named as (co)defendants. Please review the state Supreme Court’s opinions in Daily Gazette Co., Inc. v. Withrow, 177 W. Va. 110, 350 8. E. 2d 738 (1986) and Daily Gazette Co. v. Smithers, 752 S.E. 2d 603 (2013), and give thoughtful consideration to your answer. This letter constitutes a second request for information. 5312 MacCorkle Ave., S.W. #238 South Charleston, WV 25309 (681) 233-3293 (24-hour phone/fax) mslmediaine@yahoo.com Sent via email and faxMSL Media Enterprises 5312 MacCorkle Ave., SM. 238 ‘South Charleston, WV 25309 (681) 233.3293 ‘Same as above http://www.linkedin.com/in/lsmithwy ‘msimediaine@yahoo.com Fax Transmittal Form To: Kuenzel Law From: Lawrence J. Smith Name: Robert B. Kuenzel Date Sent: 03/19/2018 CC: Raamie Barker, mayor, Town of Chapmanville Phone: (304) 310-4263 Number of Pages: 02 Fax: (304) 310-4264 Omnibus Freedom of Information Act request replyHP Officejet Pro 8610 Series Fax Log for Lawrence J. Smith (304) 397-6075 Mar 192018 4:05PM Last Transaction Date Time Type Station 1D Duration Pages Result Digital FaxPUI Request tame matt Vof) FOU Request rom “Rober Kuen cob @kuantiow con 0: “snedseyabo cont (Cc “Rober Kuta? Fes 55K6 Pease ae acres Robert 8. Kuerze Keenael Law PLLC 36 Adame Street ‘Chapt, Ww 25508-0607 S04 t036 (elophone) socatr.070 fat) 3043404264 ecaine) meuhvenzeiw.can CCONMDENTIALITY NOTE ‘tps:/mail-yahoo.com/neo/b/message?pSize-25&sMid-O%Ad=Sef Mey, March 208007 AW Ti s-rat manage tom he lw off of Kus Lm, PLLC a fr the sl te of he eked tects an may corti concise egedefomation Any word Yevew ee, Sacosue sbion x hee \p* GsauaeasceKUENZEL LAw, PLLC 36 ADAMS STREET Roseer B, KueNzet P.0. Box 607 rob@kuenzellaw.com (CHAPMANVILLE, WV 25508-0607 JAMES A, MEADE, 304.310.4263 TELEPHONE alex@kuenzellaw.com 304.310.4264 FACS wonw kuenzellaw.com March 26, 2018 Lawrence J. Smith Via Electronic Delivery Only: MSL Media Enterprises msimediainc@yahoo.com $312 MacCorkle Ave., SW, #238 South Charleston, WV 25309 Town of Chapmanville FOIA Inquiry Dear Mr. Smith: Tam in receipt of your letter dated March 19, 2018. I thank you for the legal references ‘o Daily Gazette Co., Inc., v. Withrow, 177 W.Va. 110, 350 S.E.2d 738 (1986) and Daily Gazette Co, Inc., v. Smithers, 232 W.Va. 449, 752 S.E.2d 603 (2013); however, Iam unpersuaded that the information requested is discoverable through a Freedom of Information Request. Again, I note the following as the Town’s response to your request: 1, Settlements: a. Gary Price v. WV State Police, et al i. This request should be made directly to WV Board of Risk and Insurance Management, 1124 Smith Street, Suite 4300, Charleston, WV 25301 b. Mark Hatcher v. Town of Chapmanville, et al i, This request should be made directly to WV Board of Risk and Insurance Management, 1124 Smith Street, Suite 4300, Charleston, WV 25301 ation expenses: a Jane Doe et al v. Logan County Sheriff's Dept. i. This request should be made directly to WV Board of Risk and Insurance Management, 1124 Smith Street, Suite 4300, Charleston, WV 25301 b. Benny James May v. Chapmanville Police Dept. i, This request should be made directly to WV Board of Risk and Insurance Management, 1124 Smith Street, Suite 4300, Charleston, WV 2530]Lawrence Smith FOIA Request Page Two (2) 3. Salary and employment history: a Allen Browning i, Currently employed as Chief of Police ii, Any other additional information is exempt from disclosure in accordance with West Virginia Code §29B-1-4(a)(2) and West Virginia Code §29B-1- 4(a)(21) b Matthew Dingess i, Nevera Chapmanville employee ©. Derrick Miller i. Previously employed as patrolman ii. Any other additional information is exempt from disclosure in accordance with West Virginia Code §29B-1-4(a)(2) and West ‘Virginia Code §29B-1- 4@x21) a. Nick Tucker i, Previously employed as patrolman ii, Any other additional information is exempt from disclosure in accordance with West Virginia Code §29B-1-4(a)(2) and West Virginia Code §29B-1- (a2)! 4. Disciplinary history of above employees: a. This information is exempt from disclosure in accordance with West Virginia Code §29B-1-4(a)(2) and West Virginia Code §29B-1-4(a)(21) 5. Loss report of Town’s insurance carrier: a This request should be made directly to WV Board of Risk and Insurance Management, 1124 Smith Street, Suite 4300, Charleston, WV 25301 If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. 1am, Very truly yours, Robert B Kuenzel Robert B. Kuenzel RBK 'Though personnel files would be discoverable in civil actions against the individual employee, See, Maclay v. Jones, 208 W.Va. 569, 542 S.E.2d 83 (2000), it would not be discoverable in a Freedom of Information Request. I believe the same would hold true for disciplinary history as well.Cops SUMMONS CIRCUIT COURT OF LOGAN COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA JAY LAWRENCE SMITH PLAINTIFF, VS. CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-C-98 JUDGE: JOSHUA BUTCHER RAAMIE BARKER. DEFENDANT. To the above named Defendant: INTHE NAME OF THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, you are hereby Summoned and required to serve upon PRO-SE, plaintiff's attorney, whose address is ,,,, an answer including any related counterclaim you may have to the complaint filed against you in the above civil action, a true copy of which is herewith delivered to you. You are required to serve your answer within 20 days after service of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the complaint and you will be thereafter barred from asserting in another action any claim you may have which must be asserted by counterclaim in the above style civil action, Dated: April 16, 2018 OF COURT Dua (ig, DEPO hate — Please Serve: RAAMIE BARKER HC 74 BOX 3032 CHAPMANVILLE, WV 25508 di\corel\boiler\civsum.wpdSUMMONS CIRCUIT COURT OF LOGAN COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA JAY LAWRENCE SMITH PLAINTIFF, vs. CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-C-98 JUDGE: JOSHUA BUTCHER RAAMIE BARKER DEFENDANT. To the above named Defendant: INTHE NAME OF THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, you are hereby Summoned and required to serve upon PRO-SE, plaintiff's attomey, whose address is ,,,, an answer including any related counterclaim you may have to the complaint filed against you in the above civil action, a true copy of which is herewith delivered to you. You are required to serve your answer within 20 days after service of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the complaint and you will be thereafter barred from asserting in another action any claim you may have which must be asserted by counterclaim in the above style civil action, Dated: April 16, 2018 DEPUTY CLERK Please Serve: TOWN OF CHAPMANVILLE 68 BOISE ST CHAPMANVILLE, WV 25508 :\corel\boiler\civsum.wpd