STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF WAYNE JAMES BUFORD, HASSAN SAAB, CAMERON PRIEBE,

KEITH LEE, LEONARD DIXON, and KERREEN CONLEY, Plaintiffs,

LAW OFFICES THE PLATO LAW FIRM 30500 NORTHWESTERN HIGHWAY SUITE 425 FARMINGTON HILLS, MICHIGAN 48334 (248) 855-6650

Case No. 12Hon.

- CK

v. COUNTY OF WAYNE, a Michigan Municipal Corporation, and ROBERT A. FICANO, Wayne County Executive in his official and individual capacities, Defendants. Edward D. Plato (P29141) THE PLATO LAW FIRM Attorney for Plaintiffs 30500 Northwestern Highway, Suite 425 Farmington Hills, MI 48334 Phone (248) 855-6650

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF

There is no other pending or resolved civil action arising out of the transactions or occurrences alleged in this Complaint. Edward Plato (P29141) Attorney for Plaintiffs NOW COME, PLAINTIFFS, JAMES BUFORD, HASSAN SAAB, CAMERON PRIEBE, KEITH LEE, LEONARD DIXON, and KERREEN CONLEY by and through their attorney, Edward D. Plato of THE PLATO LAW FIRM, and state the following for their cause of action

against the Defendants named herein and further seek declaratory relief against Defendants, COUNT OF WAYNE and ROBERT A. FICANO, stating as follows:

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS AND JURISDICTION 1.

LAW OFFICES THE PLATO LAW FIRM 30500 NORTHWESTERN HIGHWAY SUITE 425 FARMINGTON HILLS, MICHIGAN 48334 (248) 855-6650

That Plaintiff, JAMES BUFORD, is and was at all times relevant hereto a resident

of the County of Wayne, State of Michigan. Furthermore, at all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff was and is employed with the Defendant, County of Wayne. 2. That Plaintiff, HASSAN SAAB, is and was at all times relevant hereto a resident

of the County of Wayne, State of Michigan. Furthermore, at all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff was and is employed with the Defendant, County of Wayne. 3. That Plaintiff, CAMERON PRIEBE, is and was at all times relevant hereto a

resident of the County of Wayne, State of Michigan. Furthermore, at all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff was and is employed with the Defendant, County of Wayne. 4. That Plaintiff, KEITH LEE, is and was at all times relevant hereto a resident of the

County of Wayne, State of Michigan. Furthermore, at all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff was and is employed with the Defendant, County of Wayne. 5. That Plaintiff, LEONARD DIXON, is and was at all times relevant hereto a

resident of the County of Wayne, State of Michigan. Furthermore, at all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff was and is employed with the Defendant, County of Wayne. 6. That Plaintiff, KERREEN CONLEY, is and was at all times relevant hereto a

resident of the County of Wayne, State of Michigan. Furthermore, at all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff was and is employed with the Defendant, County of Wayne.

7.

That Defendant, COUNTY OF WAYNE (hereinafter Wayne County), is a

municipal corporation and at all times relevant hereto was the employer of the Plaintiffs set forth above. 8. That Defendant, ROBERT A. FICANO (hereinafter Defendant Ficano), is a

resident of the County of Wayne, State of Michigan and at all times relevant to this action was
LAW OFFICES THE PLATO LAW FIRM 30500 NORTHWESTERN HIGHWAY SUITE 425 FARMINGTON HILLS, MICHIGAN 48334 (248) 855-6650

the Wayne County Executive. 9. That jurisdiction in this court is proper as plaintiffs seek monetary damages

above the jurisdictional limit of this Court and Defendants further seek declaratory relief pursuant to MCR 2.605. 10. That Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to MCL 600.1615 and further

because the events giving rise to this cause of action occurred in the County of Wayne and the principle place of business of Defendant Wayne County is in the County of Wayne. 11. That Plaintiffs are all high ranking County executives and appointees of

Defendant Ficano and are long time employees of Wayne County with a vast amount of institutional knowledge and expertise in their respective departments. 12. That on or about January 25, 2011, Defendants offered a retirement incentive to

all Wayne County appointees and approximately forty appointees, including Plaintiffs herein, accepted the retirement incentive which was memorialized in a Separation Agreement and Release and Waiver of Claims, an exemplary copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and the originals of which are in Defendants possession. 13. That upon realizing that the County would incur the loss of great institutional

knowledge and valuable expertise when all of the employees offered the retirement incentive accepted it, fifteen Wayne County employees, including Plaintiffs herein, were specifically

requested by Defendants to continue their employment with Wayne County and to not separate from their employment with the County until at least February, 2012. In exchange for their agreement not to immediately separate from their employment with the County and to remain until at least February, 2012, Defendants agreed that all of terms of the Separation Agreement and Release and Waiver of Claims, attached as Exhibit A will be made available
LAW OFFICES THE PLATO LAW FIRM 30500 NORTHWESTERN HIGHWAY SUITE 425 FARMINGTON HILLS, MICHIGAN 48334 (248) 855-6650

to Plaintiffs upon their delayed separation from the County employment in or after February, 2012. This agreement was memorialized in a letter to Plaintiffs and, upon information and belief, approximately nine other Wayne County appointees, dated February 11, 2011 and attached hereto as Exhibit B. 14. That in reliance upon the terms of the Separation Agreement and Release and

Waiver of Claims and in further reliance upon the agreement memorialized in the letter of February 11, 2011 as described above, approximately fifteen Wayne County employees, including Plaintiffs herein, agreed to forego their retirement from the County for at least one year in reliance upon the promise and agreement that the Separation Agreement and Release and Waiver of Claims, attached as Exhibit A would be available and applicable to them once they separated from employment with the County in or after February, 2012. 15. That in approximately September of 2011, Defendants came under intense public

scrutiny on a well publicized issue concerning a two-hundred thousand dollar severance payment by Wayne County to Ms. Turkia Mullin when she left her position as Head of Economic Development for Wayne County to take a position as the Director of the Wayne County Airport Authority in August of 2011. 16. That subsequent to the media attention and public scrutiny involving the Turkia

Mullin severance payment, Defendant Ficano directed twelve appointees into a meeting, which

was held on or about October 14, 2011, and at which they were advised that he was revoking the retirement incentive agreements they had been promised. Subsequently, almost two months later, Ms. Georgetta Kelly, Wayne Countys Director of Personnel and Human Resources, notified the Wayne County appointees (who had continued their employment with the County in reliance upon the Separation Agreement and Release, Exhibit A, and the
LAW OFFICES THE PLATO LAW FIRM 30500 NORTHWESTERN HIGHWAY SUITE 425 FARMINGTON HILLS, MICHIGAN 48334 (248) 855-6650

agreement to extend all terms of the Separation Agreement and make it available to Plaintiffs when they separate from their County employment in or after February, 2012, Exhibit B, including Plaintiffs herein) that Defendants were unilaterally rescinding the agreement with Plaintiffs and the other Wayne County appointees despite Plaintiffs and the others having continued their employment with Wayne County in full reliance on the agreement with Defendants. 17. That on January 31, 2012, Plaintiffs herein notified Defendants of their desire to

retire from their employment with Wayne County during one of the agreed upon two week windows set forth in Defendants letter of February 11, 2011, Exhibit B. 18. That Defendants have given no indication that they intend to honor the terms and

conditions of the Separation Agreement and Release and Waiver of Claims, Exhibit A, nor the agreement memorialized in the letter of February 11, 2011, attached as Exhibit B. Upon information and belief, Defendants intend to treat the said agreements as rescinded despite Plaintiffs reliance upon said agreements and continued employment with the County of Wayne.

COUNT I BREACH OF CONTRACT 19. Plaintiffs hereby adopt and incorporate by reference the allegations made in

paragraphs 1 through 19, above, as if fully set forth herein. 20. That Plaintiffs and Defendants entered into Separation Agreements, an example

of which is attached as Exhibit A, and then further agreed that Plaintiffs would not separate
LAW OFFICES THE PLATO LAW FIRM 30500 NORTHWESTERN HIGHWAY SUITE 425 FARMINGTON HILLS, MICHIGAN 48334 (248) 855-6650

from their employment with the County until or after February 2012 in exchange for Wayne County honoring the terms of the Separation Agreement for the delayed retirements. 21. That in reliance upon on the agreements between Defendants and Plaintiffs,

attached as Exhibits A and B, Plaintiffs, and others similarly situated, remained in the employ of Wayne County and did not separate from their employment from the County until or after February, 2012, in fulfillment of their part of the terms of the agreements. 22. That Defendants have not honored and have breached the agreements

described above or have otherwise wrongly attempted to rescind the agreements which Plaintiffs have relied upon, all to the detriment of the Plaintiffs. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter Judgment against the Defendants for compensatory damages in the amount Plaintiffs are entitled for Defendants breach of contract, together with costs and attorneys fees so wrongfully incurred.

COUNT II PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL 23. Plaintiffs hereby adopt and incorporate by reference the allegations made in

paragraphs 1 through 23 as if fully set forth herein. 24. That Defendants Wayne County and Ficano made specific promises to Plaintiffs,

which promises were memorialized in the agreements attached hereto as Exhibit A and

Exhibit B, while fully knowing that these promises would induce Plaintiffs to delay their retirement, although they were entitled to retire under the terms of the Separation Agreement in February 2011 and would induce them to not separate from their employment with Wayne County until or after February, 2012. 25.
LAW OFFICES THE PLATO LAW FIRM 30500 NORTHWESTERN HIGHWAY SUITE 425 FARMINGTON HILLS, MICHIGAN 48334 (248) 855-6650

That Plaintiffs did continue their employment with Wayne County and delayed

their retirement under the terms of the Separation Agreement and Release, to which they were entitled, based upon the assurances and promises of Defendants that the terms and conditions of the Separation Agreement would be made available to them if they separated their employment from the County until or after February, 2012. 26. That Defendants have not honored and have failed to fulfill the promises made to

Plaintiffs or have otherwise wrongfully attempted to rescind their promises all to the detriment of the Plaintiffs. 27. That as a direct and proximate result of the Plaintiffs reliance upon Defendants

promises, Plaintiffs have sustained damages including the compensatory as promised to Plaintiffs in the Separation Agreement and Release and Waiver of Claims and damages resulting from Defendants failure to fulfill the promises made and wrongful attempt to rescind their promises. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter Judgment against the Defendants for compensatory damages in the amount Plaintiffs are entitled for Defendants breach of promises made, together with costs and attorneys fees so wrongfully incurred.

COUNT III DECLARATORY RELIEF 28. Plaintiffs hereby adopt and incorporate by reference the allegations set forth

above in paragraphs 1 through 28 as if fully set forth herein. 29. That Plaintiffs are seeking declaratory relief pursuant to MCR 2.605 to obtain a

judicial decree that the agreements between Defendants and Plaintiffs, attached hereto as
LAW OFFICES THE PLATO LAW FIRM 30500 NORTHWESTERN HIGHWAY SUITE 425 FARMINGTON HILLS, MICHIGAN 48334 (248) 855-6650

Exhibits A and B, are valid and enforceable and that Defendants attempt to unilaterally rescind these agreements, after Plaintiffs have relied upon them and continued their employment with Wayne County, is invalid and unenforceable. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Honorable Court, pursuant to MCR 2.605, make the following declaration of rights: A. That the Separation Agreement and Release and Waiver of Claims between Plaintiffs and Defendants, an exemplary copy of which is attached as Exhibit A, and the agreement to make all of the terms of the Separation Agreement available to Plaintiffs if they agreed to delay their retirement until or after February, 2012, as memorialized in the letter of February 11, 2011, attached as Exhibit B, are valid and enforceable. B. That Defendants attempt to rescind either or both of these agreements on or about October 14, 2011, and by letter of the same date, is void, invalid, and unenforceable. C. That Plaintiffs may proceed to retire from the County of Wayne, pursuant to the terms of the Separation Agreement, during one of the two week window periods of their choosing, as described in Exhibit B, with all terms of the Separation Agreement to be applied.

D. E.

That Plaintiffs be awarded their costs and attorneys fees incurred in this action. That the Court order a speedy hearing of this action for declaratory relief and advance it on the Courts calendar pursuant to MCR 2.605(D)

F.

That the Court grant Plaintiffs such additional and further relief as the Court deems equitable, just and proper.

LAW OFFICES THE PLATO LAW FIRM 30500 NORTHWESTERN HIGHWAY SUITE 425 FARMINGTON HILLS, MICHIGAN 48334 (248) 855-6650

Respectfully submitted, _________________________________ Edward D. Plato (P29141) Attorney for Plaintiffs THE PLATO LAW FIRM 30500 Northwestern Highway, Suite 425 Farmington Hills, MI 48334 (248) 855-6650 eplato@platolawfirm.com February 17, 2012