Judge denies temporary restraining order in Drury case against mall developers

Judge Robert Horack of the 33rd Judicial Circuit Court denied the issuance of a temporary restraining order for renovation on parts of the West Park Mall following an injunction court case Monday, Dec. 9, at the Cape Girardeau County Courthouse in Jackson.

Businesses representing the Drury family joined plaintiff Timothy Drury, who requested the injunction on behalf of a family trust. They claimed that allowing mall property owners River City Centre LLC to build at 211-219 Silver Springs Road, block or alter the ring and access roads at the mall, or build on other non-permissible areas would cause the plaintiff immediate irreparable harm.

Attorneys Gerard Carmody and Richard Steele argued in favor of Drury and the businesses RAD Investments, RAD Properties and DSW Development Corp., respectively. Attorney John Steffens, meanwhile, presented the case of River City Centre LLC. Drury and River City Centre part-owner Lucas Haley each took the stand to answer questions. The case lasted some four and a half hours.

Drury and the plaintiffs' attorneys argued that building over the access roads would be a violation of the original agreement for the site as determined by Charles Drury Sr. and original mall owners May Centers of Cape Inc in 1980. They also said work on certain portions of land would be on a non-buildable landscaping area, something that no previous developer had done before.

“It says non-buildable landscape area, and to this day what is on them is grass and trees,” Drury said.

Steffens and Haley pointed to other aspects of the original master plan not accounted for, such as the addition of a Barnes & Noble bookstore at the mall in 2006, that would likewise not have been allowed if keeping with the plaintiffs’ interpretation of the master plans.

They also said the actual non-buildable areas were vague on the maps presented to the court since there was no clear delineation or cross-hatching marking them out, just arrows.

The plaintiffs’ attorneys also said construction on one access road could lead to future construction on all of them, preventing people from visiting the outlets owned by the Drury family. Steffens and Haley argued that customers would still be able to access the properties the family owned from four other access points that were not being built on in any capacity. They also said they would only be moving an access road, not eliminating it.

The original injunction had been requested in March, and at the time a key aspect of it had been a fence blocking road access because of ongoing construction. Haley said it had quickly been removed once he and the other owners realized it had been blocking traffic.

During their closing arguments, Carmody and Steele said blocking the injunction would give the River City Centre team the ability to renovate aspects of the property without the necessary covenant between property owners. In some of his closing arguments, Steffens said the plaintiffs had failed to show how they would be harmed by allowing the development.

Ultimately, Horack denied the 15-day restraining order. The parties can now set dates for the appearance of preliminary or permanent injunction proceedings in upcoming months.