Buchanan Fighting to Keep 'Coon Dog' Money

ABINGDON, Va. – It took years for Buchanan County to wrest $500,000 from two companies convicted of bribing public officials in 2002 for flood relief contracts. Now the county is fighting to keep it.

In June, a civil jury in the federal case awarded Buchanan County $250,000 from both Vansant Lumber Co. and K.J. Stephens and Associates. On Tuesday, attorneys representing both sides of the case were back in court wrangling over whether the jury’s verdict is grounded in law.

After six years of litigation, encompassing criminal and civil jury trials, the pending arguments in the “Coon Dog” case bear little resemblance to the colorful moniker that vaulted it onto late-night talk shows. The focus on the infamous coon dogs, given to the former county board chairman, has evolved into analysis of what those and other bribes mean about the value of services provided by the offending contractors.

The jury in the civil case awarded Buchanan County damages based on an amount the county paid beyond a “reasonable value” for goods and services. Both sides agree that it is reasonable to infer the contractors received some profit, or they would not have offered bribes. But they disagree on who bore the burden of proof, and whether the jury followed the law in calculating damages.

Tim McAfee, attorney for Vansant Lumber and K.J. Stephens and Associates, is arguing that the evidence presented in the three-day trial was legally insufficient for the jury to reach its verdict. He contends that the county did not meet its burden in proving that his clients received contracts beyond a reasonable value, and that jurors must have engaged in “guesswork” to arrive at the $500,000 figure.

The county, McAfee argued Tuesday, “should get zero.”

Steve Minor, who represents the county, took aim at the legal standard McAfee applied, asking Judge James P. Jones to consider the damages from the ground up.

“On his standard of review, $1 is too much” in damages, Minor said, arguing that profit beyond a reasonable value can be inferred from bribes.

McAfee also tried a second tack, in case the court upholds the jury’s verdict. He argued that his client, a part-owner of Vansant Lumber and K.J. Stephens and Associates, had forfeited $700,000 to the government in the criminal case, and that the amount already paid should supersede the civil damages.

A June 30 letter from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Virginia notes that the $700,000 was “designed for punitive purposes and to disgorge” Joe Stephens “of all profits.” That penalty was included in the $1 million the government remitted to Buchanan County, the letter states.

Minor countered by drawing a distinction between the penalty Stephens paid for racketeering charges, and the civil damages a jury assessed his companies for collecting more than a reasonable value for their services.

Judge Jones on Tuesday expressed a measure of sympathy for the defendants in the civil case, noting that the $500,000 on top of what Stephens had already paid “sticks in my craw.

“I do plenty of things required by law that stick in my craw,” Jones added.

The judge also questioned the county’s evidence that Vansant Lumber received more than a reasonable value for its services. The jury assessed both companies the same penalty, even though the first received a total of $340,000 in receipts, and the second received $1.9 million. McAfee highlighted this discrepancy as proof that the jurors applied an inconsistent formula in calculating the damages.

Minor pointed out that most of the money Vansant received came from renting equipment to the county. He told Jones one of the witnesses in the civil trial offered evidence that no one had used the equipment.

Jones, who did not recall the purported testimony, called it “extraordinary” and requested that Minor submit a copy of the relevant part of the transcript.

He indicated he would hold off on ruling until he receives the transcript. No further hearing has been set.

dgilbert@bristolnews.com | (276) 645-2558