Case 6:22-cv-01001-HLT-ADM Document 1 Filed 01/03/22 Page 1 of 5
`
`Randall K. Rathbun #09765
`DEPEW GILLEN RATHBUN & MCINTEER LC
`8301 E. 21st Street N., Suite 450
`Wichita, KS 67206-2936
`Tel: (316) 262-4000
`Email: randy@depewgillen.com
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`DISTRICT OF KANSAS
`
`))
`
`))
`
`)
`)
`
`MARY J. O’BRIEN
`
`v.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
`
`Case No.
`
`))
`
`)
`Defendant.
`______________________________ )
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`COMES NOW the plaintiff and for her cause of action against the defendant
`
`alleges and states as follows:
`
`1.
`
`The plaintiff is a resident of rural Derby, Kansas. She is the title
`
`owner of a residence and 2.5 acres of real estate with the following legal
`
`description:
`
`Parcel 1: A tract in the Southeast Quarter of Section 22, Township
`28 South, Range 1 East of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Sedgwick
`County, Kansas, described as
`beginning at the Southeast corner of said Southeast Quarter,
`thence North 325 feet, thence West 275 feet, thence South 325
`feet, thence thence. East 275 feet to the point of beginning.
`
`Parcel 2: The South 85 feet of the North 275 feet of the South
`600 feet of the East 275 feet of Government Lot 4 in the
`Southeast Quarter of Section 22, Township 28 South, Range 1
`East of the 6th Principal Meridian, Sedgwick County, Kansas.
`
`
`
`Randall K. Rathbun #09765
`DEPEW GILLEN RATHBUN & MCINTEER LC
`8301 E. 21st Street N., Suite 450
`Wichita, KS 67206-2936
`Tel: (316) 262-4000
`Email: randy@depewgillen.com
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`DISTRICT OF KANSAS
`
`))
`
`))
`
`)
`)
`
`MARY J. O’BRIEN
`
`v.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
`
`Case No.
`
`))
`
`)
`Defendant.
`______________________________ )
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`COMES NOW the plaintiff and for her cause of action against the defendant
`
`alleges and states as follows:
`
`1.
`
`The plaintiff is a resident of rural Derby, Kansas. She is the title
`
`owner of a residence and 2.5 acres of real estate with the following legal
`
`description:
`
`Parcel 1: A tract in the Southeast Quarter of Section 22, Township
`28 South, Range 1 East of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Sedgwick
`County, Kansas, described as
`beginning at the Southeast corner of said Southeast Quarter,
`thence North 325 feet, thence West 275 feet, thence South 325
`feet, thence thence. East 275 feet to the point of beginning.
`
`Parcel 2: The South 85 feet of the North 275 feet of the South
`600 feet of the East 275 feet of Government Lot 4 in the
`Southeast Quarter of Section 22, Township 28 South, Range 1
`East of the 6th Principal Meridian, Sedgwick County, Kansas.
`
`
`
`Case 6:22-cv-01001-HLT-ADM Document 1 Filed 01/03/22 Page 2 of 5
`
`The street address for the property is 3116 E. 55th Street,
`Derby,KS.
`
`2. The home was built in 1982 and was purchased by the plaintiff on
`January 12, 2007.
`3. The source of water for the residence is a well located on the
`property which reaches into the regional acquifer. It is the only source of water for
`the premises.
`4. The defendant United States of America through the United States
`Department of the Air Force operates McConnell Air Force base approximately 1.5
`miles from Ms. O’Brien’s property.
`5. This action is brought pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28
`U.S.C.§ 2771 et.seq. The plaintiff’s Form 95 claim was filed pursuant to the Act on
`or about March 8, 2021. The defendant acknowledged the claim on March 16,
`2021 and denied the claim on September 21, 2021.
`Factual Background
`6. McConnell's history began in October 1924, when the city of Wichita
`hosted more than 100,000 people for the National Air Congress. The event was
`used by city planners to raise funds for a proposed Wichita Municipal Airport.
`The event was a success and ground-breaking ceremonies for the airport were
`held on 28 June 1929.
`7. In August 1941, the Kansas National Guard 127th Observation
`Squadron was activated as the first military unit assigned to the Wichita airport.
`A lease between the federal government and the city was concluded in March,
`1942, and the AAF Materiel Center, Midwestern Procurement District (Materiel
`Command) was established at Wichita Army Airfield.
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 6:22-cv-01001-HLT-ADM Document 1 Filed 01/03/22 Page 3 of 5
`
`8. By the summer of 1950, Boeing was ready to turn out the first
`production models of the B-47, and the United States Air Force sought to make
`Wichita Airport a permanent military installation. Public hearings began to
`consider locating an Air Force base near the Wichita Boeing facilities, and the city
`of Wichita was awarded $9.4 million to build a new airfield for its own use. On
`May 31, 1951, the USAF took title to Wichita Municipal Airport. The Federal
`Government took over the property by federal court action during the first half of
`1952, thus becoming the owner and no longer a lessee.
`Operations at McConnell Air Force Base
`9. Operations at the McConnell AFB also included fire fighting training.
`Aerosal fire fighting foam was used at eight different training areas on the base.
`Two different componds make up the foam: per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
`(PFAS), including perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid
`(PFOA).
`10. The EPA has developed lifetime health advisory levels for PFOS and
`PFOA in drinking water. The lifetime health advisories provide federal, state, and
`local drinking water system operators information about contaminants that can
`cause human health effects to system users if they are ingested above a specified
`level for a long period of time. The plaintiff’s groundwater is comtaminated at
`twice the advisory level.
`11. The plaintiff had no idea that her groundwater had been
`contaminated with these compounds until she was notified by the United States
`Department of the Air Force in September 2020. The Air Force has refused to
`disclose to the plaintiff how long it has known that her groundwater is
`contaminated. It admits, however, that it is the likely source of her groundwater
`contamination.
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 6:22-cv-01001-HLT-ADM Document 1 Filed 01/03/22 Page 4 of 5
`
`12. Since the defendant contaminated the plaintiff’s water, the defendant
`provides the plaintiff with seven three gallon jugs of water per month from
`Culligan Water. It is fully aware, however, that the plaintiff continues to use the
`contaminated water from her well for household purposes including showering.
`13. The defendant is also fully aware that a developer next door to her
`property has authorized connection to city water. It refuses to allow this
`connection because it doesn’t want to have to pay for an alternative water source.
`14. The contaminated groundwater ruined the plaintiff’s property value.
`It has caused great annoyance, inconvenience and loss of peace of mind to the
`plaintiff.
`WHEREFORE the plaintiff respectfully prays for a judgment in the amount
`of $350,000, plus her costs and any further relief this Court would deem just or
`equitable.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`DEPEW GILLEN RATHBUN & MCINTEER LC
`s/Randall K. Rathbun
`Randall K. Rathbun #09765
`8301 E. 21st Street N., Suite 450
`Wichita, KS 67206-2936
`Tel: (316) 262-4000
`Fax: (316) 265-3819
`Email: randy@depewgillen.com
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`DESIGNATION OF PLACE OF TRIAL
`COMES NOW the plaintiff and designates Wichita, Kansas, as the place of
`the trial of this action.
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 6:22-cv-01001-HLT-ADM Document 1 Filed 01/03/22 Page 5 of 5
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`DEPEW GILLEN RATHBUN & MCINTEER LC
`/s/Randall K. Rathbun
`Randall K. Rathbun #09765
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`REQUEST FOR JURY TRIAL
`COMES NOW the plaintiff and respectfully requests a trial by jury with
`regard to the above-captioned action.
`Respectfully submitted,
`DEPEW GILLEN RATHBUN & MCINTEER LC
`
`
`
`/s/Randall K. Rathbun
`Randall K. Rathbun #09765
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`
`
`5
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
