Hennon v. Rollins et al

Filing 49

MOTION by Plaintiff Samuel L Hennon for judgment against Defendants Rollins and Rogers (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Plaintiff's affidavit, # 2 Exhibit return of service, # 3 Exhibit return of service exhibits)(Andry, Armand)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EATERN DIVISION SAMUEL HENNON, Plaintiff, v. BO ROLLINS, CHARLES ED ROGERS, And MICHAEL STEPHENS, Defendants. ) ) ) ) No. 07 C 5235 ) ) Judge Gottschall ) ) ) )

PLAINTIFF SAMUEL HENNON'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANTS BO ROLLINS AND CHARLES ED ROGERS NOW COMES THE PLAINTIFF, SAMUEL HENNON, through his attorney, Armand L. Andry, and submits the following as his Motion for judgment against Defendants BO ROLLINS and CHARLES ED ROGERS and in support thereof would state the following: 1. Defendants BO ROLLINS and CHARLES ED ROGERS were served in this case on 11/23/2007. (See attachments) 2. MICHAEL STEPHENS, who was dismissed from the matter. 3. Defendants BO ROLLINS and CHARLES ED ROGERS have failed to file any appearance in this matter since they were served.

1

4. Defendants BO ROLLINS and CHARLES ED ROGERS, are agents of National PVA who represented Plaintiff in concert with VA representatives on his Veterans benefits claims. 5. Plaintiff is a veteran of the U. S. Navy between 1969 through 1972. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 1) 6. During his time in service he suffered injuries that were service connected. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 2) 7. Plaintiff used PVA to represent him on my claims to benefits for service connected disabilities. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 3) 8. In April 2004, Plaintiff received an award for disability compensation for service connected disabilities of 100% which would have given him an award of @ $2,600/month. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 4) 9. By July 2007 the award amount was $3,172.00/month. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 5) 10. Plaintiff met Bo Rollins, a part of the National PVA hierarchy, in Spring of 2005 and he took issue with the fact that Plaintiff had worked to get the Vaughn Chapter of PVA off probation. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 6) 11. Plaintiff was an active member of the Vaughan chapter of PVA (VCPVA) and was elected to the Board of the VCPVA in October 2005. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 7)
2

12. Plaintiff, exercising his first amendment rights, has always been an outspoken advocate for veterans and helped them to put their disability cases together and helped them to file appropriate forms and directed them to service officers; Plaintiff was the webmaster for Veterans for Unification; Plaintiff was the founder of the Veterans Voting bloc Illinois chapter and created and ran websites for them; Plaintiff was the founder and owner of WVBSR, which is a veterans broadcasting systems radio station. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 8) 13. Plaintiff In his various advocacy roles frequently had differences of opinions with VA officials including Michael Stephens. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 9) 14. Also in his various advocacy roles Plaintiff frequently differed with Veterans service groups including PVA. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 10) 15. In March 2006 Plaintiff went to Washington D. C. to lobby congress on behalf of the national PVA regarding bills pending. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 11) 16. While in Washington D. C. on March 8, 2006 Doug Vollmer, the Administrative Executive Director for National PVA for Governmental Relations, said to Plaintiff that Plaintiff had embarrassed the organization with his questions to Senator Craig and Carl Blake, Senior Legislative
3

Director and Blake Ortner, Associate Legislative Director objected to Plaintiff bringing up the need to serve homeless veterans and said that this was not the time to bring that up. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 12) 17. After Plaintiff returned from Washington he drafted a letter of complaint on the poor service being delivered by the National service officers of PVA and the service by Chicago Regional Office of VA. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 17) 18. Plaintiff asked to review his veterans benefits file and was allowed to do so but was not allowed to copy from the files and was given only one hour to review. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 14 and attached exhibit 14) 19. Plaintiff learned from examining his VA records on October 19, 2006 with his wife, that Ed Rogers, National PVA field director, had been communicating without his knowledge or consent with Michael Stephens, the Director of the Chicago Regional VA office where he referred to Stephens as "My friend" and referred to Plaintiff's claim as a "pot of poop" in an e-mail dated April 7, 2006. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 15) 20. Further review by Plaintiff of his VA benefits file showed that without his consent the PVA National field service officer Ed Rogers and Bo Rollins, National Director of Field Services and Michael Stephens initiated a review of his disability benefits which made no sense because he was already
4

receiving 100% benefits and had never requested any reviewed nor was he advised that either VA or PVA was on their own reviewing my benefits file. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 16) 21. In communications between Rogers, Stephens, and Rollins reference was made to Plaintiff's veterans advocacy websites, the wording of an e-mail of April 20, 2006 was "Look at the client's websites." (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 17) 22. In June of 2006 Plaintiff received a letter from National PVA indicating that VA was reviewing my benefit entitlements. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 18) 23. Plaintiff had not requested this review and had no idea why there would be a review of his file as he was already receiving a 100% disability benefit package. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 19) 24. On March 2, 2007, I received a letter from Chicago Regional Office reducing my benefits form 100% to 60%, which meant a reduction of my monthly award from $3,172 to $1,826.00. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 20 and attached exhibit 20) 25. Since March of 2007 to September 2009, Plaintiff has lost $39,000 in benefits. In addition Plaintiff lost $1,000 each year in educational benefits which the State of Illinois gives to 100% veterans tuition assistance of

5

$1,000 per child. I have two children who were eligible. Plaintiff lost $4,000 of this benefit. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 21) 26. Plaintiff has also had to see his Psychiatrist, Dr. George Paniotte, for the anxiety he suffered because of the actions by PVA and VA. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 22) 27. With the 100% Plaintiff could have been eligible for a vehicle allowance for adaptability 0f $13,000 which he applied for and was denied. (See affidavit of Plaintiff ¶ 23) 28. Defendants actions were taken in violation of Plaintiff's first amendment rights. 29. Defendants actions have cost Plaintiff $39,000.00 in lost monthly benefits; $4,000.00 in lost educational benefits; $13,000.00 in vehicle allowances; and aggravated his pre-existing psychological distress. 30. Plaintiff, therefore, seeks a judgment of $56,000 plus and amount for aggravating pre-existing psychological distress. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff moves for judgment against Defendants BO ROLLINS and CHARLES ED ROGERS and for such other further proceedings as the court deems appropriate. Respectfully Submitted, ____Armand L. Andry____
6

ARMAND L. ANDRY & ASSOCIATES One South Dearborn Suite 2100 Chicago, Illinois 60603 773/626-3058

7