The victory in the first legal battle between the owners and the residents of Oakland Park, the manufactured homes park west of Austin, goes to the residents – all 90-plus of them who filed a complaint against the park in November.

Monday, September 18, 2000

The victory in the first legal battle between the owners and the residents of Oakland Park, the manufactured homes park west of Austin, goes to the residents – all 90-plus of them who filed a complaint against the park in November.

Judge Joseph F. Wieners denied a motion made by the lawyer for the defense, Jeffrey Kritzer, to dismiss the complaint. The judge’s decision came Aug. 29, almost two months after he heard the arguments for and against dismissal in the Mower County Third Judicial District Court.

The residents’ complaint contained a number of allegations, including 31 park rules that the mobile home park owners had included in their lease agreement that the residents thought were unreasonable. The residents also included in their complaint allegations concerning the park’s storm shelter, water drainage, rental charges, late and maintenance fees as well as retaliation by park management.

The two sides have a long history of disputes, which started shortly after Oakland Park Inc. purchased the mobile home park from Leighton Nelson’s Wheel Estates. Residents have complained to the Austin City Council repeatedly, and even involved the state attorney general’s office in the matter.

Brandon Lawhead, the lawyer representing the residents’ coalition, said the judge’s decision vindicated his clients’ position.

"His order made it very clear that he believed there were numerous problems with that lease, something we’ve been contending all along," Lawhead said.

The denial of the defense’s motion for the judge to dismiss the case doesn’t, however, mean the issues have been anywhere close to resolved, it simply means they live to be decided by a future judge or jury or settled in mediation.

Kritzer said, while he was disappointed with the judge’s decision, he saw some hope in the fact that the judge only highlighted as unreasonable four of the 31 park rules that the residents objected to. Wiener made no decision on the remaining 27 rules.

However, in the decision Wiener wrote that "Although the court analyzes these four … numerous other provisions cause the court serious concern. These provisions, if not altered, are subject to being stricken."

The four rules the judge used as examples of unreasonable were the following: a rule giving the park management authority to deny admittance to any overnight visitor or guests whom the landlord reasonably believes will be disorderly or fail to abide by the rules and regulations; a rule preventing no more than two unrelated adults from accompanying a home; a rule prohibiting "for sale" signs without prior written approval, which was in direct violation of Minnesota law; and a rule prohibiting basketball poles of any kind except toy poles.

Even with Weiner’s decision, the motions on this case are far from finished. On Tuesday, Lawhead introduced his own motion for summary judgment on some of the issues, and asked for an amendment to the complaint to claim punitive damages.

Because the District Court is still short a judge with the death of Judge Michael Seibel this past year, another judge – this one Judge Lawrence Agerter from Dodge County – will decide on the residents’ motion.

"We’ve asked the judge to decide on some motions as a matter of law," Lawhead explained, "but certainly some things, like damages, will go to trial." Judges can decide complaints that they determine are a matter of law, but matters of fact are to be decided by a jury.

Kritzer said he was hoping the two parties could move into mediation, and resolve the issues by the end of October.

"We’re confident that we can reach a satisfactory conclusion for both sides," Kritzer said.