Image: Left to right, Cynthia Jamieson who lost the race for Montgomery County District Clerk, James Metts, Stephanne Davenport who lost the race for Montgomery County Treasurer, and Jason Dunn.
Conroe and Splendora, April 30 – James Metts, the embattled JP who rarely shows up for work and yet still is seeking a promotion from his $126,000 per year job to Precinct 4 County Commissioner, has had some interesting lawsuit settlements that he’s paid or caused the taxpayers to pay.
Here’s a smattering of some of the lawsuits where Metts has either paid settlements or forced the taxpayers to pay for him:
- In 2004, Metts paid a settlement when he was sued for the wrongful death of a man who was in a fatal truck accident after Metts pulled his logging truck out and failed to yield.
- In 2014, Metts forced the taxpayers of Montgomery County to pay $45,000 in a sexual harassment settlement after the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission found that Metts demanded sex from a County employee, threatened to hit her if she wouldn’t have sex with him, and eventually terminated her employment due to her refusal.
Public court documents reveal that in 2017, Metts settled a lawsuit with a Splendora couple who sued him for trespass and theft of timber in the 410th District Court of Montgomery County, District Judge Jennifer Robin presiding. The Golden Hammer confirmed the details of this story with some of the parties who requested anonymity. Metts didn’t return telephone calls to the court office where he rarely appears for work.
A couple owns a six acre homestead parcel in the Splendora area that contained 540 trees which they had hoped would remain a forested buffer from real estate development near their property. The couple never intended to do business or have anything to do with Metts or the logging company that is one of his full-time jobs that pulls him away from performing his duties as JP. (Metts only works an average of about 6 hours per month as a Justice of the Peace, even though he draws a lucrative full-time salary from the taxpayers.)
When they purchased their homestead property in 2012, the couple didn’t intend to thin, remove, or trim the trees, so they would enjoy their new homesite in isolation, serenity, and shade. Sadly, an adjoining property owner, who owned 262 acres, also made a terrible mistake when he hired Metts to cut and remove timber on that adjoining property in order to facilitate some development the adjoining property owner planned. Therefore, the adjoining property owner entered into a timber removal agreement with Metts for the twelve-month period beginning January 24, 2016. The adjoining property owner provided Metts a survey, so Metts would be able to ascertain the boundary of the property he was supposed to clear.
Metts, whose recklessness extends from his waste of County tax dollars to many other areas of endeavor, failed to ascertain the boundaries of the 262 acres to avoid trespassing on someone else’s property. Metts didn’t care.
In 2016, Metts swiftly “clear cut…[the couples’] trees, removing the trees and leaving the Property denuded, damaged by ruts, stumps and cutting dunnage he casually left behind.” In other words, Metts clear-cut the trees of the couple who owned the 6-acre tract which they had purchased as their quiet homestead which, until Metts arrived, had been buffered with beautiful trees. Metts’ focus as a timber-cutter is destruction for money. Therefore, he failed to restore the surface of the couple’s property by removing stumps and leveling. The couple suffered more than $12,000 in expenses to level their formerly beautiful forest property. More significantly, the couple lost trees the value of which they estimated to be around $4,500 per tree, a Metts-caused loss of approximately $2,430,000!
The couple, which had not yet moved to their new home, was stunned how utterly reckless Metts and his team of woodcutters were in crossing over onto their property to destroy their entire 6-acre parcel of land.
After making a demand on Metts and the owner of the adjacent property, the couple filed a lawsuit in September, 2016, against Metts and the owner of the 262 acre tract of land next door. Eventually, Metts settled with the couple out of court.
If Metts were to become a County Commissioner, despite his legal problems and poor work habits, the citizens of East Montgomery County would face a dire situation. In the world of James Metts, property rights mean nothing when his woodcutting crew wants its way. As a County Commissioner, would Metts save the taxpayers funds for the purchase of road rights-of-way by just plowing through private property at will?
If Metts were to become a County Commissioner, he’d be one of the first in the history of Montgomery County not to own property in his own name, in order to avoid payment of at least two major judgment and federal tax creditors to whom Metts owes enormous sums of money. Perhaps, that he doesn’t own any property himself explains why he has a total disregard for the property rights of others.