FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS HTTLE .. U.S ... › news › documents › ...residents, with businesses organized pursuant to the laws of Arkansas, or for Arkansas architectural

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

HTTLE R-0€K DIVISION

MARLON BLACKWELL ARCHITECTS, P.A.

~ .. , FILED

U.S. DISTRICT COURT • EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS

DEC 2 0 2019

JAMES W. McCORMACK, CLERIC

By: ~a?-:@.CLERK

Plaintiff, This case assigned to District Judge ~ and to Magistrate Judge VolP"-'

V.

HBG DESIGN, INC.; SARACEN DEVELOPMENT, LLC; and JOHN LANE BERREY in his official capacity as Chairman of the Quapaw Tribal Business Committee

Defendants.

Case No. J,{: /'f-CV'..-'f~5-J<.G0

COMPLAINT

* * * JURY TRIAL DEMANDED * * *

Plaintiff Marlon Blackwell Architects, P.A. brings this action for permanent injunctive

relief and damages for copyright infringement, tortious business interference, breach of contract,

and unjust enrichment.

NATURE OF THE CASE

1. In 2018 and early 2019, Plaintiff Marlon Blackwell Architects, P.A. ("MBA"), an

internationally recognized and award-winning architectural design firm, performed a substantial

amount of architectural design work for the Quapaw Nation's Saracen Casino Resort project in

'

Case 4:19-cv-00925-KGB Document 1 Filed 12/20/19 Page 1 of 55

Pine Bluff, Arkansas. Another architectural firm, Defendant HBG Design, Inc. ("HBG"), was

brought on to assist with the project. The Quapaw Nation agreed to pay MBA and HBG an

architectural fee of 6% of the project's overall budget. Based on that, MBA and HBG agreed to a

roughly 35% and 65% split of all net architectural fees on the project. But instead of honoring

these agreements, HBG and the Quapaw Nation have stolen MBA's copyright-protected

architectural designs for that project, and refused to pay MBA what it is owed for its work on the

project. To facilitate this misappropriation, HBG poisoned MBA's relationship with the Quapaw

Nation by telling falsehoods to tribal Chairman John Lane Berrey, causing MBA to be removed

from the Saracen Casino Resort project. The Defendants are continuing to use those copyright

protected designs without MBA's authorization, and without crediting MBA for its authorship of

them. MBA is bringing this lawsuit to hold them accountable for their wrongful and unlawful acts.

PARTIES AND JURISDICTION

2. Marlon Blackwell Architects, P.A. ("MBA") is an architectural firm having its

principal office in Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas. Its principal architect is Marlon

Blackwell. It is a Professional Association organized under the laws of Arkansas.

3. HBG Design, Inc., formerly known as Hnedak Bobo Group, Inc., is a corporation

organized under the laws of Tennessee. It advertises that it does "hospitality design," which means

it designs hotels, restaurants, and spas. HBG's principal office is located in Memphis, Shelby

County, Tennessee. Its registered agent for service of process in Arkansas is CT Corporation

System, 124 W. Capitol Ave., Ste. 1900, Little Rock, AR 72201. HBG is registered to do business

in Arkansas as a foreign corporation. It regularly transacts millions of dollars with Arkansas

residents, with businesses organized pursuant to the laws of Arkansas, or for Arkansas architectural

projects.

2


4. Saracen Development, LLC is a limited liability company organized under the laws

of Arkansas, having a principal place of business in Pine Bluff, Arkansas. The Quapaw Nation

expressly authorized the creation of Saracen Development, LLC, in order for the LLC "to own,

finance, manage, and operate the [Saracen] Casino." See Quapaw Nation Resolution No. 061019-

A. The Quapaw Nation has also expressly waived tribal sovereign immunity in connection with

the creation and operation of the Saracen Development, LLC. See Quapaw Nation Resolution No.

060519-A. Saracen Development, LLC does not enjoy any sovereign immunity. It is an Arkansas

created limited liability company, organized as a distinct legal entity under state law, with only

one organizing officer: Attorney Alex Gray of Little Rock, Arkansas. This for-profit entity's

purpose is to maximize revenue from Arkansas residents who are or will be gaming at the Saracen

Casino. It is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Downstream Development Authority of the

Quapaw Nation.

5. John Lane Berrey is the duly elected Chairman of the Quapaw Tribal Business

Committee, which is the elected legislative body of the Quapaw Nation. The Quapaw Nation is

geographically situated inside the state of Oklahoma. In his official capacity, Chairman Berrey is

responsible for management of tribal government and oversight of tribal business, among other

things. Notwithstanding whatever tribal sovereign immunity the Quapaw Nation may enjoy from

suits for damages, Chairman Berrey and his successors in office may nevertheless be sued in their

official capacities for injunctive relief. See Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, 572 U.S.

782, 796 (2014); Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d). Chairman Berrey is being sued only for injunctive relief

in his official capacity as Chairman, and not for damages in his individual capacity.

3


6. Federal question jurisdiction is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, as this

Court has original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the federal Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C.

§§ 101 et seq.

7. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), this Court has supplemental jurisdiction over all state

law claims arising from the same operative facts.

8. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) because a substantial

part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part

of property that is the subject of the action is situated, within this district. Venue is also proper in

this district under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(a) because all defendants or their agents have committed, and

are committing, acts of infringement of MBA's copyrighted works in this district, and have

established and regularly conducted business in Arkansas.

FACTS

9. Plaintiff MBA is an architectural services firm. MBA's founder and principal

architect is Marlon Blackwell. Mr. Blackwell is a Fellow of the American Institute of Architects

("F AIA") whose work is internationally known and respected. He is also the E. Fay Jones Chair

in Architecture and a Distinguished Professor in the Fay Jones School of Architecture and Design

at the University of Arkansas. He served as architecture department head from 2009 to 2015 and

was named among the "30 Most Admired Educators" by Designlntelligence in 2015.

10. In 2016, MBA was declared the No. 1 design firm in the United States by Architect

Magazine.

11. On December 11, 2019, Marlon Blackwell was awarded the American Institute of

Architects ("AIA") Gold Medal, which is the organization's highest honor, recognizing those

whose work has had an enduring impact on the theory and practice of architecture. "Every Marlon

4


Blackwell design is a new lesson in the transformative ability of architecture to reveal the

uniqueness of every site and give meaning to any program, to achieve an expressive clarity in

strong and simple forms," wrote Julie V. Snow, FAIA, in a letter supporting Blackwell's

nomination. "In every way, across all measures, the work raises our expectations for our own

architecture and teaches us that it is possible to exceed what appears to limit us."

12. In 2019, MBA's design for Shelby Farms Park was awarded the National Design

Award by AIA.

13. In 2014, Mr. Blackwell was named a United States Artists Ford Fellow in

Architecture and Design. In 2012, Mr. Blackwell received the Architecture Prize from

the American Academy of Arts and Letters.

14. Thirteen projects by MBA have been recognized with national awards by the AIA,

including the AIA Honor Awards for Vol Walker Hall/Steven L. Anderson Design Center at the

University of Arkansas (2018), the Crystal Bridges Museum Store at Crystal Bridges Museum of

American Art (2015), the Little Rock Creative Corridor (2014), St. Nicholas Eastern Orthodox

Church (2013), and the Ruth Lilly Visitors Pavilion at the Indianapolis Museum of Art (2012), as

well as AIA Housing Awards for Graphic House (2017) and L-Stack House (2008). MBA has an

international design reputation through recognition of its work in many publications, including

architectural design journals and books. The firm has received more than 120 design awards,

including state, regional, national and international awards.

15. MBA and Mr. Blackwell have worked with the Quapaw Nation in the past and

enjoyed an excellent business relationship.

16. Mr. Blackwell's primary connection and goodwill was with John Berrey, the

Chairman of the Quapaw Tribal Business Committee, with whom MBA and Mr. Blackwell have

5


worked on architectural projects dating back to before 2016. MBA did many different architectural

projects with the Quapaw Nation, including the John Berrey Wellness Center, an events center,

and a VIP entrance and VIP lounge for the Downstream Casino and Resort.

17. This past proven business relationship was built upon trust, and was excellent. For

example, in 2016 Chairman Berrey told Mr. Blackwell that "We love you, care about you and want

a long relationship."

18. In 2018, more than 85,000 petition signatures were collected to place Arkansas

ballot initiative Issue 4 on the ballot for consideration by the voters of the entire state, to authorize

gaming casinos in Crittenden, Garland, Pope and Jefferson Counties. A vote of "yes" to the

initiative would permit the Arkansas Racing Commission to authorize one casino in each of these

four counties. The cost of gathering such signatures was estimated at more than $1,416,481.

Attorney Alex Gray filed the initiative. Mr. Gray is also Saracen Development, LLC's sole

organizing officer.

19. The primary proponent of Issue 4 was the Downstream Development Authority of

the Quapaw Nation, which reportedly contributed at least $3,853,353.50 in support of Issue 4.

Arkansas campaign finance reports indicate the total amount spent advocating in support of Issue

4 was more than $10,209,129.15.

20. More than one year in advance of the election, Chairman Berrey personally

contacted Mr. Blackwell requesting architectural plans and conceptual designs of a proposed

gaming resort in Pine Bluff, Arkansas in order to "sell the deal" to the voters of Arkansas.

Chairman Berrey gave numerous explicit assurances to MBA and Mr. Blackwell that MBA would

do the architectural work on the project.

6


21. Over many weeks and months, MBA adopted an "all hands on deck" approach.

MBA invented and created copyright-protected inspirational images, architectural drafts,

architectural exterior and interior plans, computer line drawings, and design expertise to formulate

a unified material and formal logic having unique and never-before-seen kind of architectural

design for the proposed casino.

22. On July 6, 2017, Chairman Berrey declared that MBA's architectural ideas,

drawings, and renderings were critical and that he needed such work to be readied and prepared

before an important meeting that would occur ten days later in Little Rock. At that time, Chairman

Berrey stated the tribe did not have an actual site where the casino would go in Jefferson County,

but he again assured MBA that it would be the firm to do the architectural plans and design for the

casino in the event the voters passed Issue 4. No other architectural firm was being considered for

the project at that time.

23. MBA provided to Chairman Berrey a substantial volume of images, plans,

renderings, and architectural designs, and Chairman Berrey responded very favorably on July 13,

201 7. Over the next several days, MBA prepared and provided to Chairman Berrey a digital

presentation having designs, images, drawings, and architectural renderings that were unique to

MBA' s architectural inspiration and expertise. Chairman Berrey reported to MBA that the

meetings were going well and "our friends loved your vision." On information and belief, the use

of MBA' s architectural inspirations, designs, architectural visualizations, and renderings were

essential to the success of the meeting with the original investors and interested parties who later

provided substantial support in furtherance of Issue 4 as well as funding for the ultimate project.

24. MBA's original vision for the architecture of the new casino was dramatic and

constituted a substantial departure from other casinos around the country. The roof and tower had

7


an exceptionally unique design comprising a unified material and formal logic theory and

structure.

25. In August 2018, Chairman Berrey again contacted MBA with additional requests

to further develop and update the earlier Pine Bluff casino renderings, and to discuss moving

forward with the project in the event Arkansas voters passed Issue 4. Prior to August 2018, MBA

had already conducted design studies and initial concept reviews, submitted renderings, and had

meetings to discuss updates.

26. In September 2018, Chairman Berrey personally met with Mr. Blackwell to go over

the future direction of the project in the event the voters passed Issue 4. During that meeting,

Chairman Berrey repeatedly assured Mr. Blackwell that MBA would be the architectural firm to

handle the entire project. At that meeting and in the weeks following, Chairman Berrey requested

additional renderings, including even more aerial and interior renderings.

27. Polling conducted by the Talk Business & Politics-Hendrix Poll in September

2018 indicated only 41 % of the sampled voters supported Issue 4.

28. In the months leading up to the election, MBA prepared even more extensive

designs, drawings, concept renderings, and information in September 2018, to show potential

investors and the voters of Arkansas in support of Issue 4 and the Pine Bluff casino and resort.

Some of those materials are shown below:

8


VIEWS: AERIAL

Vl[W SUMMARY:: SUNSCT

VIEWS: ENTRY DRIVE

Vl(W SUMM AR Y: NtGKT

11 ..... , ... ,

''"""'"' !1!•!•111111, 1!!!!!111!1

1!!!!!!!!1+! Ill!!!!!!!!!

11111!!!!!!'! ltlli!I •

29. In advance of the election, MBA provided to Chairman Berrey more renderings

used by proponents of Issue 4 to advance the cause. Such renderings were widely distributed to

the press and the public to advertise and aggressively promote the benefits of the casino. Some of

the renderings provided to Chairman Berrey are shown below:

9


10


30. In late October 2018, in the weeks prior to the election, Mr. Blackwell asked

Chairman Berrey how the promoters and others were enjoying MBA's architectural designs,

renderings and images depicting the future casino. Chairman Berrey responded that "they love

them." In reply, Mr. Blackwell wished Chairman Berrey luck in the upcoming election, to which

Chairman Berrey responded "Thank you bro, I'm so glad you['re] part of it."

31. The voters narrowly changed the Arkansas Constitution by passing Issue 4 on

November 6, 2018, with 54% of the voters approving the initiative.

32. On November 7, 2018, when the vote count was official, Mr. Blackwell

congratulated Chairman Berrey, who responded "I'm so happy brother." Soon thereafter, the two

set up a meeting to discuss moving forward with the project and to further create plans to begin

construction, since time was of the essence.

33. On November 30, 2018, Chairman Berrey sent a photo of the headstone for Chief

Saracen to declare the name of the casino, to which Mr. Blackwell responded "Thank you. Let's

honor him well."

34. Chairman Berrey explicitly authorized MBA to begin working as the architectural

firm to design the entirety of the Saracen Casino Resort. MBA mobilized its architects, assistants,

and even hired additional staff to proceed in a time-of-the-essence project, as Chairman Berrey

had declared he wanted the entire construction project to be completed in less than eleven months.

This time line meant MBA' s initial design drawings, and its more refined construction drawings

and plans, would need to be expedited and completed in less than six months.

11


35. Over the next several months, MBA met with many members of the Quapaw

Nation, the directors of the casinos, the construction team, investors, financiers, financial advisors,

and planners in furtherance of the Saracen Casino Resort project.

36. In December 2018, MBA worked with the Quapaw Nation to identify and actively

interview and assist Chairman Berrey in the selection of construction firms, electrical engineers,

structural engineers, and other potential additional architectural firms who could assist in the

preparation of engineering and construction site plans.

37. In December 2018 and January 2019, MBA worked extensively and exhaustively

on an accelerated timeline, including working over the holidays in advance of a kickoff meeting

held January 9, 2019. MBA prepared scoping for the project, roof drawings and design, modeling,

lobby designs, mechanical designs, structural designs and coordination, mechanical room

drawings and designs, area estimates, consultant directions, revised renderings, Revit BIM

repositories for a collaborative approach, and many other essential elements to the architecture and

progress towards construction. During these months, MBA and its team worked cooperatively

with many people as the lead.

38. During December 2018 and January 2019, MBA discussed with Chairman Berrey

and other authorized representatives on this project the efficiencies that could be earned in working

with an additional architecture firm. MBA identified three potential architecture firms, and

recommended the Memphis, Tennessee design firm HBG. But for MBA, HBG would not have

been considered.

39. On December 19, 2018, HBG was selected to assist in the rendering of construction

drawings; but Chairman Berrey required MBA to retain primary responsibility in order to retain

12


the integrity of the original design, which was by this time very well known to all investors and to

the voters of Arkansas.

40. MBA was explicitly engaged to preserve the "Design Intent." To streamline the

process, a Responsibility Matrix was created and agreed to by MBA and HBG. MBA provided

HBG with documents identifying responsibilities for each party. The Responsibility Matrix

specifically outlined in Exhibit A to this Complaint, is generally outlined below:

RESPONSIBILITY MATRIX 1809- Saracen Casino Resort 2019.01.03

Throughout the project Marlon Blackwell Architects will have primary responsibility for the Design Intent of all Exteriors, Public Facing Spaces, including Public & Guest Space Interiors. MBA will provide oversite of the development of the project through phases marked as Secondary. MBA will identify critical design elements that which will have a greater continued involvement of the MBA team throughout the project. MBA will review critical elements and details to ensure adherence to Design Intent, but the details will be developed by HBG. HBG Design will provide support for program blocking and analysis, and production support where required by MBA. HBG will have primary responsibility for the functional arrangement and operational coordination of all back of house facilities. HBG will moreover have primary responsibility for Coordination and Documentation, including both drawings and specifications, and Construction Administration.

41. In furtherance of this forward-looking collaboration and sharing of responsibilities,

MBA provided to HBG assistants and architects its plans, drawings, sketches, schematics,

footprints, renderings, and many other essential work product, including architectural computer

files in .pdfformat, .rvt [for Revit BIM], .ai, .psd, .ls, .eml, and substantially complete architectural

schematic design plans for the Saracen Casino. Throughout this project, HBG had direct access

to MBA' s copyrighted architectural works and designs.

42. MBA worked closely with HBG representatives in order to design the overall

project and formalize the contractual relationship between HBG and the Downstream

Development Authority of the Quapaw Nation.

13


43. A January 15, 2019 Initial Authorization Agreement between HBG and Chairman

Berrey is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit B. That agreement specifically requires HBG to

"coordinate with Marlon Blackwell Architects to develop the scope of services for the full services

Project." Under the Initial Authorization Agreement, MBA and HBG were to be paid $250,000

as an initial mobilization towards the substantial amount of work that would be performed over

the duration of the construction project. That agreement explicitly identified how the parties would

later enter into a "full-services Agreement in substantial similar form as AIA Document B 103-

2017 Standard form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect." The Initial Authorization

Agreement was executed by Paul H. Bell on behalf of HBG, and by Chairman Berrey on behalf of

the Quapaw Nation's Downstream Development Authority.

44. The project was identified with a complete "Cash Flow Schedule" for the

architectural professional fees, as calculated using a budget of $248,000,000 for the entire

construction project. (The project has recently been reported in Arkansas Business as a

$350,000,000 project). That Cash Flow Schedule is attached as Exhibit C to this Complaint. It

estimated total architectural fees for the project at 6.25% of cost of work, or $15,500,000. This

amount was exclusive of $1,945,000 in additional fees for other services including civil

engmeermg.

45. The Downstream Development Authority subsequently agreed to pay an

architectural fee of 6.0% of cost of work, but insisted that the fee be all-inclusive, including civil

engineering. An email from Chris Roper on behalf of the Downstream Development Authority

memorializing that agreement is attached as Exhibit D to this Complaint.

46. MBA and HBG agreed to split all net architectural fees for the duration of the

project 34.42% and 65.58%, respectively, according to a Schedule that is attached to this

14


Complaint as Exhibit E. Consideration for this agreed split was adequate, in that MBA was

contributing its copyrighted designs and nationally acclaimed architectural professional services,

which formed the Design Intent and foundation for the project. Additional consideration included

MBA' s efforts to support HBG in securing this contract, and MBA' s substantial work in reviewing

HBG's work on the project.

4 7. The fee-splitting agreement between MBA and HBG was memorialized and

confirmed by HBG through its authorized principal, Paul H. Bell, in an email that is attached to

this Complaint as Exhibit F ("Since we have come to agreement on the percentage of fee split,

can you fill out the deliverables that MBA anticipates providing?").

48. In response, MBA's Project Architect Kertis Weatherby itemized the deliverables

in a Work Split Matrix for the project, which is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit G. MBA

relied upon this delegation of duties and the professional fee-split agreement for the duration of

the project.

49. MBA was to have the primary role in all aspects as the Design Firm, and also to

assist HBG with the construction-type architecture aspects by reviewing HBG's work in order to

maintain the Design Intent of the project. MBA retained the ability to review HBG's work in order

to retain the integrity of its designs, which were the foundation upon which the architectural work

for the project was built.

50. HBG identified for MBA and all other parties a design schedule, demonstrating that

all professional architectural services rendered by either HBG or MBA was to be completed in less

than twelve months. That design schedule is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit H.

51. HBG only paid to MBA $100,000 as an initial payment to mobilize on the project,

which was from sums paid to HBG by Downstream Development Authority or its Arkansas limited

15


liability company, Saracen Development, LLC. HBG proceeded forward with the agreement of

sharing responsibilities and proceeds.

52. MBA worked extensively with HBG and Chairman Berrey, and created a

substantial volume of work in furtherance of the fast-paced timelines established by Chairman

Berrey and others connected with this project.

53. For example, in February 2019, MBA provided to Chairman Berrey a Plan B roof

line for the casino, and explored and offered affordable alternatives for the roof design in an effort

to stay within budget, which was reportedly shrinking due to economic factors beyond MBA' s

control.

54. On February 18, 2019, MBA had already created a substantial body of work and

was providing substantial guidance in working cooperatively with HBG. MBA created and

circulated various plans for roof design and other updates on the project. MBA had productive

teleconferences with Chairman Berrey and others working on the construction and planning of the

Saracen Casino as MBA was actively involved and was devoting substantial time and its resources

to the casino project.

55. On February 23, 2019, the Pine Bluff Commercial reported that the plans for the

Saracen Casino Resort were underway, and that the construction costs would be as much as $240

million dollars. In the same article, Chairman Berrey indicated the casino would have soft

openings prior to 2020.

56. On February 26, 2019, Mr. Blackwell checked in with Chairman Berrey and offered

compliments and congratulations to the team by stating "Our design team and the construction

team are working diligently together to get issues resolved and get the project in on budget while

16


maintaining design and functional integrity .... I am confident of our direction and getting the

project in line with expectations ... and yes this is fun! All the best and have a great day!"

57. In response, Chairman Berrey confirmed the excellent working relationship and

declared, "You made my day brother!"

58. Plaintiff worked extensively with HBG and Chairman Berrey from January through

March without problem or incident, and the project was proceeding in due course without delay or

problems.

59. On March 6, 2019, MBA attended a meeting with Chairman Berrey and the

directors working on the project, along with HBG and contractors. The information MBA

prepared for that meeting met all the previously identified budgetary requirements. MBA left that

meeting with the understanding that everything was going well and that the project was on target.

60. On March 8, 2019, as demonstrated by an article in the Pine Bluff Commercial

dated March 9, 2019, Chairman Berrey boasted to the public that the Saracen Casino project could

be completed in less than eleven months, as it only took ten months and twenty-six days to

construct the Downstream Casino and Resort in Oklahoma. Chairman Berrey declared his desire

to have the same short timeline with the Saracen Casino Resort in Pine Bluff. See

https://www .pbcommercial.com/news/20190309/casino-operator-outlines-pb-project-at-meeting

(last visited on December 20, 2019).

61. At that March 8 public meeting, Chairman Berrey explicitly touted MBA's

architectural designs and renderings. Those designs were unique and were created by MBA. The

following photo from that meeting was published with the Pine Bluff Commercial article. It clearly

depicts the same images identified at Paragraph 29 of this Complaint:

17


l!! BUY PHOTO • HIDE CAPTION

John Berrey, a Quapaw Tribe chief and chairman of Downstream Media Group, speaks at a Thursday meeting at the Pine Bluff Convention Center. · Pine Bluff Commercial/Luke Matheson

62. At all times relevant to these claims, MBA worked in good faith and was

cooperative with HBG in full satisfaction of its obligations under its agreements with HBG and

the defendants. MBA was also the exclusive source of the foundational intellectual property for

the Saracen Casino project.

63. At all times relevant to these claims, MBA had completed a substantial amount of

work to get this project finalized, and the casino was on track to be completed within reasonable

timeframes and within the original budget.

64. At all times relevant to these claims, MBA was assisting HBG and was a substantial

contributor to the long-term success of the project.

65. Something happened prior to March 9, 2019 that caused Chairman Berrey to

become angry and agitated, and on information and belief, the information that upset Chairman

Berrey was false. On information and belief, HBG representatives-including HBG's principal

18


Rick Gardner-misled and misinformed Chairman Berrey about MBA' s conduct and role in the

Saracen Casino Resort project.

66. On information, HBG provided false information to Chairman Berrey to exclude

MBA from continued work in order to avoid paying the agreed 34.42% fee split.

67. On March 13, 2019, MBA was excluded from an important meeting involving HBG

and other members of the team. Two days later, Chairman Berrey suggested to Mr. Blackwell that

''we should part ways on this project." Despite Mr. Blackwell's continuous attempts after that to

learn what had gone wrong and how to mend the relationship, those efforts were to no avail. On

March 26, 2019, Chairman Berrey informed Mr. Blackwell that after "talking to all of the team"

he could not see MBA "returning in the current capacity."

68. On information, an HBG representative later bragged to a disinterested witness

about "schmoozing the Indians" in order to force MBA off of this project in order to save the

agreed 34.42% fee split.

69. Notwithstanding the express agreement with MBA, HBG stopped working with

MBA and has not paid to MBA its 34.42% share.

70. Notwithstanding the express agreement with MBA, HBG continued using all plans

and carried forward with the entire project without compensation to MBA.

71. MBA created the original architectural plans and design for this casino.

72. MBA was authorized by Chairman Berrey to create these unique designs, which

are the product of Mr. Blackwell and many other members of MBA' s architectural team. They

are original and substantial contributions to architecture, and are the product of many hours of

work and years of expertise. Such intellectual property and drawings and designs are copyrighted

and protected by federal law.

19


73. MBA reached express agreements with both HBG and other defendants to perform

high quality professional architectural services and designs, among an enormous amount of other

substantial work, as demonstrated by the Responsibility Matrix, the fee sharing schedules, the

timeframe for professional fees for the project that was due and legally owing to Plaintiff by HBG,

and the continued work MBA did to develop this project by freely sharing its work product with

HBG.

74. At all times MBA operated in good faith. MBA introduced HBG to Chairman

Berrey to expedite this project, given the short timelines ofless than one year to do this substantial

job. Yet HBG has apparently elected to proceed forward in making derivative works from MBA' s

intellectual property, in violation of copyright laws and of the parties' express agreement to share

the fees for the entire project on a 34.42% / 65.58% split.

75. HBG was brought into the project to assist MBA in the implementation ofMBA's

designs for this casino. HBG continued working with MBA's designs and has made derivative

works without MBA' s authorization.

76. HBG continued forward on the project in willful disregard to its agreement to split

the professional fees on this project.

77. HBG continued forward on the project in willful disregard of the norms of

architectural practices.

78. HBG then claimed original authorship to the project in submitting to the Pine Bluff

Planning Commission design plans dated July 15, 2019 having exclusive authorship and stamping

from Paul Bell and HBG Design, Inc. stamps, making no reference to MBA. In such plans, the

work by MBA is retained in all material respects.

20


79. In communications updating the public as to the status of the project, on December

2, 2019, HBG released to the public press images depicting the Saracen Casino and HBG claimed

exclusive authorship to the iconic designs created by MBA, and such information was republished

to the public via Arkansas Business in an article that referenced he current status of the project.

See https:/ /www. arkansasbusiness.corn/article/ 128983/casino-expansion-upside-includes-hotels

tourism-boost (last visited on December 13, 2019).

An architectura l rendering of the $350 million Saracen Casino Resort in Pine Bluff. Construction is expected to be completed by the end of 2020 . (Saracen Casino/HBG Design of Memphis)

80. HBG continued forward on the project and made only insubstantial changes to

MBA' s designs, keeping the main features of the design that were touted by Chairman Berrey and

all proponents in support of Issue 4.

81 . HBG elected to cut costs and make some functional changes; however, HBG

elected to retain all material aspects of MBA' s design, preserving the images, architectural drafts,

architectural exterior and interior plans, computer line drawings, and design expertise to formulate 21


a unified material and formal logic having unique and never-before-seen kind of architectural

design for a proposed casino.

82. HBG has misappropriated MBA's original designs and architectural works for its

own benefit and is now advertising its work to the general public.

83. By its conduct described above, HBG violated Rule 1.402 of the AIA's Code of

Ethics and Professional Conduct, which states that "Members shall not engage in conduct

involving wanton disregard of the rights of others."

84. By its conduct described above, HBG has violated Rule 2.106 of the AIA's Code

of Ethics and Professional Conduct, which states that "Members shall not counsel or assist a client

in conduct that the architect knows, or reasonably should know, is fraudulent or illegal."

85. By its conduct described above, HBG has violated Ethical Standard 3.3 of the

AIA's Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct, which states that "Members should be candid and

truthful in their professional communications and keep their clients reasonably informed about the

client's projects."


AIA's Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct, which states that "Members should pursue their

professional activities with honesty and fairness."

87. By its conduct described above, HBG has violated Rule 4.103 of the AIA' s Code

of Ethics and Professional Conduct, which states that "Members speaking in their professional

capacity shall not knowingly make false statements of material fact."


of Ethics and Professional Conduct, which states that "Members shall treat their colleagues ...

with mutual respect, and provide an equitable working environment."

22



AIA' s Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct, which states that "Members should build their

professional reputation on the merits of their own service and performance and should recognize

and give credit to others for the professional work they have performed."


of Ethics and Professional Conduct, which states that "Members shall recognize and respect the

professional contributions of their ... professional colleagues, and business associates."

91. Marlon Blackwell received the highest award available to an architect, the AIA

Gold Medal. HBG' s conduct stands opposite the ethics and ideals of architecture and business.

CAUSES OF ACTION

COUNT ONE - COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT against all Defendants

92. MBA owns all right and title to MBA-E _ 20181130 scr preliminary scoping, having

registration No. VA 2-172-502, and MBA-B _ 20170715 scr concept, having registration No. VA

2-172-372 (the "Registrations"). MBA has applied for but has not yet received the Certificate of

Registration for numerous other copyrighted works connected to the Saracen Project.

93. Defendants, by virtue of their continued reproduction, distribution, displaying, and

performance of MBA' s protected architectural and design works, including those described by the

Registrations, and by their making of derivative works from the same, are infringing the exclusive

rights of MBA to these architectural and design works.

94. Only MBA has rights to reproduce, distribute, display, or perform these protected

architectural and design works, or to make derivative works therefrom.

23


95. Defendants are infringing upon MBA's exclusive rights, and Defendants are not

authorized to use, reproduce, distribute, display, perform, or make derivative works from MBA's

protected architectural or design works.

96. MBA has been damaged by such conduct and is entitled to an award of statutory

damages or actual damages, upon MBA' s election prior to trial.

COUNT TWO - TORTIOUS BUSINESS INTERFERENCE against HBG

97. MBA had a valid contractual relationship and/or business expectancy with the

Quapaw Nation and Saracen Development, LLC regarding the Saracen Casino Resort project.

98. HBG had knowledge of that contractual relationship and/or business expectancy.

99. HBG induced or caused a disruption or termination of that contractual relationship

and/or business expectancy by intentional and improper interference.

100. HBO's disruption or termination of that contractual relationship and/or business

expectancy was a proximate cause of damage to MBA.

COUNT THREE-BREACH OF CONTRACT against HBG

101. MBA and HBG entered into an agreement and contract which could be performed

within one year and as memorialized and detailed through numerous communications and written

schedules, itemized fee splitting agreements, and detailed allocation of collaborative work

responsibilities, all of which were authorized and made using an authorized agent for HBG and

MBA.

102. The agreements were supported by adequate consideration comprising not only the

compensation schedules but also the implied license to continue to develop derivative works from

MBA' s foundational designs and other copyrighted works.

24


103. The agreement required HBG to perform or not to perform certain acts, including

payment to MBA of 34.42% of all net architectural fees for the duration of the Saracen Casino

Resort project, together with other potential architectural fees generated from this project.

104. MBA did what the agreement and contract required of it.

105. HBG did not do what the agreement and contract required of it.

106. HBG's breach of the agreement and contract caused damage to Plaintiff.

107. Such damage is easily and readily identifiable by the documents provided with this

complaint and as exchanged between the parties, and the direct calculation establishes a sum

certain of not less than $4,452,227.00.

COUNT FOUR - UNJUST ENRICHMENT against HBG and Saracen Development, LLC

108. MBA provided services to HBG and Saracen Development, LLC, who received the

benefit of such services.

109. The circumstances were such that MBA reasonably expected to be paid the value

of such services by HBG and Saracen Development, LLC.

110. HBG and Saracen Development, LLC were aware that MBA was providing such

services with the expectation of being paid, and accepted the services.

111. HBG and Saracen Development, LLC have not paid MBA the reasonable value of

such services received by HBG and Saracen Development, LLC.

COUNT FIVE - PERMANENT INJUNCTION against all Defendants

112. Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction against Defendants from use of the entire

architectural and design works created by MBA for the Saracen Casino Resort project, and from

making any further derivative works therefrom.

25


113. Plaintiff seeks an order directing Defendants to account for all instances of their

efforts to sell, transfer, market, or disclose to third parties the architectural and design works that

form the subject matter of this controversy.

114. Plaintiff seeks an order directing Defendants to destroy and not retain or again use

without permission all copies of such architectural and design works owned by Plaintiff.

115. Plaintiff seeks an order directing Defendants to revisit every document associated

with the Saracen Project and insert the following declaration to avoid any misperception that HBG

is an owner, author, or creator of the designs and works connected to the Saracen Casino and

Resort as follows: "This work is derivative of copyrights owned by Marlon Blackwell

Architects, P.A."

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

116. MBA is entitled to have and recover judgment against HBG and Saracen

Development, LLC in a sum not less than $4,452,227.00.

117. MBA is entitled to a permanent injunction against all Defendants prohibiting them

from using the architectural and design works MBA created for the Saracen Casino Resort project,

and from making any further derivative works therefrom.

118. MBA is entitled to an award of damages for copyright infringement pursuant to

statute, to be ascertained at trial at the election of MBA.

119. MBA demands a trial by jury.

Wherefore, Plaintiff Marlon Blackwell Architects, P.A. prays this Court award it

permanent injunctive relief against all Defendants, and enter judgment in its favor against

Defendants HBG Design, Inc. and Saracen Development, LLC in a sum not less than $4,452,227,

26


together with interest as allowed by law and the costs of this action including a reasonable attorney

fee, and award it all other appropriate relief.

By: Mark Murphey Henry, rk. Bar No. 97170 Joseph Hall, Ark. Bar o. 2012191 ROSE LAW FIRM, a Professional Association P.O. Box. 4800 Fayetteville, AR 72702 Telephone: (479) 695-1330 Fax: (479) 695-1332 [email protected] [email protected]

and

Jack East III, Ark. Bar No. 75036 1100 N. University Ave., Ste. 140 Little Rock, AR 72207 Telephone: (501) 372-3278

Counsel for Plaintiff

27


MARLON BLACKWELL ARCHITECTS

RESPONSIBILITY MATRIX 1809 - Saracen Casino Resort 2019.01.03

42 East Center Street

Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701

P 479.973.9121

marlonblackwell.com

Throughout the project Marlon Blackwell Architects will have primary responsibility for the Design Intent of all Exteriors, Public Facing Spaces, including Public & Guest Space Interiors. MBA will provide oversite of the development of the project through phases marked as Secondary. MBA will identify critical design elements that which will have a greater continued involvement of the MBA team throughout the project. MBA will review critical elements and details to ensure adherence to Design Intent, but the details will be developed by HBG. HBG Design will provide support for program blocking and analysis, and production support where required by MBA. HBG will have primary responsibility for the functional arrangement and operational coordination of all back of house facilities. HBG will moreover have primary responsibility for Coordination and Documentation, including both drawings and specifications, and Construction Administration.

• Understanding that this project will not move in a traditional phase schedule, we will still refer to phase levels in our narrative below, in order to rely on standard understandings of the level of development.

Definitions: Primary:

Secondary:

Support:

Responsible for guiding the direction and schedule of progress, as well as establishing the standards of deliverables. Responsible for supporting the capacity of the Primary Architect according to the standards above. [MBA to develop selected portions, oversee design intent; HBG to review for expertise (program, compliance, etc) and to provide supplemental production capacity.] Responsible for guiding the direction and schedule of progress, as well as establishing the standards of deliverables.

Sitg (Parking, RV Park, Q Store)

• MBA: Concept+ Design Intent Primary/ SD Secondary I DD Secondary I CD Secondary I CA Support • HBG: Program Primary/ SD Primary/ DD Primary/ CD Primary/ CA Primary

Outbuildings (Warehouse, Daycare, Fire, EMS+Police, Q Store)

• MBA: Concept+ Design Intent Primary/ SD Secondary I DD Secondary I CD Secondary I CA Support • HBG: Program Primary/ SD Primary/ DD Primary/ CD Primary/ CA Primary

outdoor Events

• MBA: SD Primary/ DD Primary/ CD Secondary/ CA Support • HBG: SD Secondary I DD Secondary/ CD Primary/ CA Primary

EXHIBIT ,~


Main Facility

Core/ Shell

• MBA: SD Primary/ DD Primary/ CD Secondary I CA Support • HBG: SD Secondary I DD Secondary I CD Primary/ CA Primary

Gaming (Floor/ Table Games/ EGM / Poker/ VIP)

• MBA: SD Primary/ DD Equals/ CD Secondary I CA Support • HBG: SD Secondary/ DD Equals/ CD Primary/ CA Primary

Food + Beverage (Kitchens / Dining Areas / Walk-ins)

• Front of House o MBA: SD Primary/ DD Primary/ CD Secondary I CA Support o HBG: SD Secondary/ DD Secondary I CD Primary/ CA Primary

• Back of House o MBA: SD Secondary/ DD Secondary I CD Secondary I CA Support o HBG: SD Primary/ DD Primary/ CD Primary/ CA Primary

Hotel (Guest Services/ Guest Rooms/ Amenities/ Retail/ VIP)

• MBA: SD Primary/ DD Equals/ CD Secondary I CA Support • HBG: SD Secondary I DD Equals/ CD Primary/ CA Primary

Events (Meeting Spaces/ Banquet Hall / Indoor Venue I Gaming Stage)

• MBA: SD Primary/ DD Primary/ CD Secondary I CA Support • HBG: SD Secondary/ DD Secondary I CD Primary/ CA Primary

RESPONSIBILITY MATRIX Saracen Casino Resort

2018.01.03

Administration (Compliance/ DDA / Directors/ Finance/ HR/ Marketing + Promotions/ Employee Services)

• MBA: Concept Primary/ SD Secondary I DD Secondary I CD Secondary I CA Support • HBG: Program Primary/ SD Primary/ DD Primary/ CD Primary/ CA Primary

Technical Operations (Cage/ Surveillance/ Security/ IT)

• MBA: Concept Primary/ SD Secondary I DD Secondary I CD Secondary I CA Support • HBG: Program Primary/ SD Primary/ DD Primary/ CD Primary/ CA Primary

Physical Operations (Housekeeping/ Maintenance/ Warehouse I Shipping + Receiving/ Central Plant)

• MBA: Concept Primary/ SD Secondary/ DD Secondary I CD Secondary/ CA Support • HBG: Program Primary/ SD Primary/ DD Primary/ CD Primary/ CA Primary

PAGE 2 OF 10 MARLON BLACKWELL ARCHITECTS


Design Architect in Tandem with Architect of Record DRAFT Matrix of Responsibility and Deliverables

P = Prime Responsibility S = Support Role

EC= Elevator Consultant CW= Curtainwall Consultant

N = No Role N/A = Not Appl icable

CC= Code Consultant SV=Surveyor/Exi sting Conditions Analyst ZA=Zoning Attorney MEP = MEP Engineer MC= Measurement Consultant

Design Phase/ Activity Design Architect

MBA

Project Start-up I Due Diligence Phase

Client Conferences p

Project Document Website (Box) s Programming & Planning

Establishment of Program Requirements s Program Analysis p

Space Requirements/ Relationships p

Design Concept p

Building Massing p

Site Investigation Site Survey & Topographic Mapping s Geotechnical Investigation s Existing Conditions N/A

Preliminary Energy Model & System Analysis (As s Required)

Building and Zoning Code Analysis Zoning Analysis s Preliminary Building Code Analysis s Preliminary Civil/ Site Analysis s Energy Code Analysis s Quantification analysis - SF & BOMA Cales p

Quantification analysis - Energy Envelope s LEED (As Determined to be Required)

LEED Charrette s Project Registration s Preliminary Scorecard & Strategy s

Phasing & Constructability Preliminary Phasing Plans m Constructability Testing m

Preparation of Conceptual Design Documents

Site Plan p

Plans (typ ical) p

Sections (typical) p

PAGE 3 OF 10


2018.01.03

CV=Civil Engineer CM=Construction Manager SC=Sustainability Consu ltant PE=Permit Expediter LD=Landscape Designer SE= Structural Engineer

Architect Consultant of Record or CM

HBG Consultant

or CM

s s

s p

p

s

s p (CV)

s p (CV)

N/A P (CV,SV)

s P (SC/MEP)

s P(ZA) p S(CC)

s P(CV)

s P(SC/CC)

s P(MC)

s P(MEP)

s P(SC)

s P(SC)

s P(SC)

m P(CM)

m P(CM)

s s s

Owner

ODA

p

p

p

p

p

p

p

s

p

p



Design Phase/ Activity

Elevations {typical) Digital Models Concept Renderings Preliminary Materials/ Finishes Preliminary Core(s)

Preliminary Structural Grid(s) Collation of Concept Design Documents Cost Estimating Presentation to Owner Design Guidelines Outline Specifications (Issue templates) Outline Specifications (Architecture Design Intent) Outline Specifications (Architecture, Back of House)

Design Description Coordination of Structural/MEP Engineers

Owners Full Concept Design Approval and Approval to proceed to SD

Schematic Design Phase Client Meetings & Administration

Project Management Design Management Project Document Website (Box) Programming & Planning Establishment of Program Requirements Program Analysis Site Analysis Space Requirements/ Relationships Building and Zoning Code Analysis

Preparation of Schematic Design Documents:

Site Plan Floor Plans (typical)

Amenity Floor Plans Sections and Details (typical) Elevations and Details (typical) Exterior Envelope (typical conditions) Materials Core (typical floors) ¼"= 1 '-0"

Lobby Elevations¼"= 1 '-0" Lobby Plans¼"= 1'-0"

Sta irs Elevator Cabs 3-D Working Images

Preliminary Unit Layouts and Finishes

PAGE 4 OF 10

Design Architect Architect of Record

MBA HBG

p s p s p s p s p p

p p

p s s s p p

p s s p

p s s p

p s s p

s p

p s s s

s s p p

p s p p

s p

p s p s p p

p s p s p s p s p p

p s p s s p

s p

p s p p


2018.01.03

Consultant Owner or CM

Consultant DOA

or CM

S (MEP)

S (SE)

P (CM)

p

s p

p

p

p

p

P (ZAIC() p

S(CW)




Prel iminary Unit Matrix Area Calculations - SF & SOMA

Design Guidelines

Outline Specifications (Issue Templates)

Outline Specifications (Architecture Design Intent)

Outline Specifications (Architecture, Back of House)

Design Description

Coordination of Structura l/Mechanical/E lectrical Engineers

Coordination of Design Consultants (Fa<;ade, Lighting, Landscape, Graphics etc.)

Sample Tenant Layout (As Required) City Agency Approvals Meetings

Permitting/ Entitlements Investigation & Assistance

Coordination of Renderings, Models, Photos

Collation of Schematic Design Documents

Presentation of Schematics to Owner Selection of Major Building Materials

Cost Estimating

Review of Owner's Project cost estimate and generation/presentation of value engineering suggestions

Incorporation of Owner's approved value-engineering elements into the design documents.

Owners Full Schematic Design Approval and Approval to proceed to DD

Design Development Phase Project Management

Design Management

Cl ient Meetings & Administration

Project Document Website (Box)

Sample Tenant Layouts

Coordination of Structural /Mechanical/Electrical Engineers

Coordination of Design Consultants (Fa<;ade, Lighting, Landscape, Graphics etc.)

Coord ination and Incorporation of Design Details and Specifications recommended or prepared by other subconsultants.

Selection of Major Building Materials

Preparation of Design Development Documents:

Site Plan Plans (Public floors) 1 /8" = 1 '-0"

Plans (Service Floors) 1 /8" = 1 '-0"

Elevations (all) 1 /8" = 1 '-0"

PAGE 5 OF 10


MBA HBG

p p

s p p s s p p s s p p s p p

p p

p s s s s p p s s p p s p s s s p p

p p

p s s p

s s p s p p

p p

p p

p s p s p s p s s p p s


2018.01 .03


Consultant DOA

or CM

p (MC)

p (ZA) p

P (ZA, CV, PE)

P(CM) p

P(CM) p

p

p

p




Sections (typical) 1 /8" = 1 '-0" Curtain Wall/Storefront Details 1 /2" =1 '-0" Core Plans¼"= 1 '-0" (after core layout freeze)

Lobby Elevations (all)½"= 1 '-0" Lobby Plans (all)¼"= 1 '-0"

Public Area Flooring Plans 1 /8" = 1 '-0" Publ ic Area Reflected Ceiling Plans Public Area Wall Sections Stairs (after core layout freeze) Materials Elevator Cabs

Area Calculations - SF & BOMA Design Guidelines

Development of Architectural Specifications Development of Architectural Design Specification Sections Review Plan with applicable Agencies Coordination of Renderings, Models, Photography, Brochures Collation of Completed Design Development Documents

Presentation of Design Development Documents to Owner/Developer Cost Estimating Review of Owner's Project cost estimate and generation/presentation of value engineering sueeestions Incorporation of Owner's approved value-engineering elements into the design documents. Owners Full Design Development Approval and Approval to proceed to CDs

Construction Documents Phase Project Management Client Meetings & Administration Project Document Website (Box) Consultant Coordination Preparation of Construction Documents:

Site Plan Floor Plans 1/8" = 1'-0" Core Plans ¼"= 1 '-0" Building Elevations 1 /8" = 1 '-0" Building Sections 1 /8" = 1 '-0" Stair Plans ¼"= 1 '-0" Stair Sections¼"= 1'-0"

PAGE 6 OF 10


MBA HBG

p s p s s p

p s p s p s p s p s s p

p s p s

s p

p s s p

p s

s p

p s

p p

p s

s s p p

p p

s p

s s s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p


2018.01.03

Consultant Owner or CM Consultant

ODA or CM

P(CW)

P(MC)

P(CC)

P(CM) p

p

p

p

p




Stair Details Elevator Plans ¼" = 1 '-0"

Elevator Sections ¼"= 1 '-0"

Escalator Plans and Sections Wall Sections at Building Base ½" = 1 '-0"

Cladding Details Elevations at Exterior Storefronts½"= 1 '-0" Exterior Storefront Details½"= 1 '-0" Public Area/Amenity Floor Plans 1 /8" = 1 '-0" Public Area/Amenity Reflected Ceiling Plans Public Area/Amenity Wall Sections Washroom Plans, Elevations and Details Elevator Cab Plans, Elevations, and Details Enlarged Unit Plans¼"= 1 '-0"

Cost Estimating

Unit Matrix Room Finish Schedule Color Schedule

Specifications (as applicable): Division 1 (tender forms, general conditions) Technical Sections

Concrete Masonry Metals Steel, Stairs, and Rail ings Carpentry Waterproofing Roofing Insulation Fire Proofing

Doors and Frames Entrances and Screens Skylights Hardware Windows Plaster, Gypsum Board Tile Marble, Granite

Flooring Painting Louvers Washroom Accessories Mirrors Colors

PAGE 7 OF 10


MBA HBG

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p p s s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s s s p

s p p s

s s s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p p s


2018.01.03

Consultant Owner orCM

Consultant DOA

or CM

S(CW)

S(CW)

P(CM) p

p

P(CW) s

P(CW)




Technical refinement of exterior public space elevations, details for build ing enclosure, curtain wa ll, lobby fin ishes, landscape and elevator cabs fo r incorporation into Construction Documents* Area Calculations - SF & BOMA Collation of Contract Documents Submittal of CDs to applicable Agencies Presentation of CDs to Owner Coordination of Engineering Services/Specialty Consultants Owners Approval

Code & Permitting Code Interpretation Presentation of Local Authorities Presentation to Community Groups Zoning Calculations Building Permit Filing Building Department Liaison Issues Review drawings for Code Compliance (all design phases) Certificate of Occupancy filing (including sign-off for work)

Bidding and Negotiation Project Management Bid Meetings & Administration Preparation of Bid Documents (Drawings and specs) Reproduction and Distribution of Plans and Specs Process of Contractor's Questions and Information during Bidding Preparation of Addenda Receive and review bids with Owner Prepare Bid Analysis Recommend award for negotiation Negotiate front end documents & qualifications Contract Document review and markup Issue conformed set to confirm clarifications Issue Bulletin No. 1 / Issued for Construction Set

Construction Administration Phase Project management Construction Meetings & Administration Coordination of Engineering Services Construction Administration

PAGE 8 Of 10


MBA HBG

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

s p

I~ p

p p

p p

s p

s s m p

p

s

s s s s s p

m s s p

s p

s s m m m m m ~ m In s p

s p

s s

s p

s p


2018.01.03

Consultant Owner or CM Consultant

DOA or CM

P(CW,LD)

P(MC)

p

p

S(CC) p

S(ZA) S(ZA) P(PE) s S(PE) s P(CC)

P(CM) s

p

P(CM) p

p

p

p

p

p

p

p

p

p

P(CM)



Design Phase/ Activity Design Architect Architect of Record

MBA HBG

Continu ing On Site Presence s p

Periodic Site Reviews p p

Manage Submittal Process s s Construction Management Software Review/Action shop drawings, mock-ups and samples P (Design p

of all architectural items for common areas, facades, Intent) main lobby, typical floor lobbies, bathrooms, etc.

Coordinate Material Selections and Colors p p

Manage RFI Process s Provide Clarifications - Drawings and Specifications s p

Respond to RFls s p

Manage Bulletin Process - Drawings and ~ p

Specifications Issue Bul letin Drawings and Specifications s p

Review Change Order Proposals (PCOs) s s Review & Approve Payment Certificates ~ p

Process Payment Certificates Complete Substantial Completion review s p

Prepare and Issue Substantial Completion certifi cate Im p

Receive and review As-Bu ilt drawings and ID m. specifications Receive and review Warranty data m m Conduct/administer punch list s p

Furniture, Furnishings, and Equipment Project Management s s Furn iture and Furnishings p s

Publ ic Area/Amenity Furniture and Furnish ings p s Design Intent and Review Model Hotel Unit Furniture and Furnishings Design p s Intent and Review Coord ination of Furniture and Furnish ing s p

Installation Coordination of Equipment Planning and Instal lation s p

Notes: (All consultants to read notes listed below together with responsibility matrix)


2018.01.03


Consultant DOA

or CM P(CM) p

P(CM)

P(CM) S(CM)

P(CM)

s

p

p

p

S(CM) p

p

P(CM) p

S(CM) s

p

1. Design Architect to review shop drawings, architectural submittals and mock-ups for design intent. 2. Each engineering and specialist consultant to review Shop Drawings for which they are the prime

responsible. ie. The consultant that writes their respective specification section is the prime review of the corresponding shop drawings and other submittals. The AoR shall provide overall review gatekeeping responsibility for submittals.

3. Architect of Record will collaborate with the Construction Manager to establ ish a Shop Drawing Review process for all consultants. Design Arch itect shall review submittal log to identify all submittals requiring Design Architect review and support.




2018.01.03

4. Design Architect to review items of design interest during Construction Documents, Shop Drawing Review and Field Review.

5. Architect of Record to provide periodic site review for which they are prime responsible as listed above. 6. Bid packages and performance specifications (e.g. design assist) for certain items of the work may be

required out of sequence and prior to completion of DD or CD phases. CM shall identify all such areas. 7. Design Architect to obtain all requisite Design Approvals from the client for each phase. Design

Architect's designs must be coordinated with up to date program, technical, tenant fit-out, and area requirements

8. Design Architect to be available for presentations to City Planning and local Community Boards, if required .

9. Each team member (architects and consultants) is responsible for the completeness of their own separate packages and submitting at the required deadlines.



January 15, 2019

Downstream Development Authority

Attn: John L. Berrey, Chairman

69300 E. Nee Road

Quapaw, OK 74363

RE: Downstream Development Authority - Saracen Casino Resort - Pine Bluff, Arkansas

Initial Authorization for NE Design Services

Ladies and Gentlemen:

HBG Design, Inc. (the "Architecn is pleased to submit its initial authorization for professional design services

for the above referenced project. We are excited about the opportunity to join your team and see this

important project through to completion. This letter will serve as a letter of authorization to allow HBG Design

to continue to proceed with work. The parties intend, at the earliest possible date, to enter into a full-services

Agreement in substantially similar form as AIA Document 8103-2017 - Standard form of Agreement Between

Owner and Architect (the "Owner-Architect Agreement") .

The initial services will be based on the attached Preproposal Presentation Package. HBG Design will

coord inate wit h Marlon Blackwell Architects to develop the scope of services for the fu ll services Project. The

Scope of Work, proposed consu ltant teams, Cost of Work budget and design and construction schedule will

be defined based on Owner information and will be incorporated into the Owner-Architect Agreement.

During the initial authorization, the Architect will submit a mobilization fee in the amount of $250,000 to be

paid as a first payment. We anticipate reaching a mutual agreement for a fu ll services fee with in 3 to 4

weeks. Upon agreement, of fu ll services fee , we will send a second invoice for services rendered as of March

1, 2019 to be paid in our normal billing cycle. We will continue to invoice month ly based on percent complete th ru completion of basic services. Upon approval by the Owner of the Architect's fee for the full services

Project. amo'lmts paid by the Owner under th is in itia l authorization for the Arch itect's services wi ll be cred ited

against the Architect's tota l approved Basic Services fee for the Project.

Designing Experience. , MEMPH IS , S AN [)l f (;Q , wwwhbgde, ,gn

EXHIBIT

i b

One Commerce 5Quare 40 South Main Street. Suite 2300

Memphis. TN 38103 901-525·2557


HBG has developed this initial authorization based on our understanding of the Owner's requirements. After reviewing the proposal, if you require additional information or clarification, please don 't hesitate to contact me so that we can prepare revision to reflect your intentions.

Sincerely,

HBG DESIGN, INC.

QJtlwff Paul H. Bell, AIA Principal

Approved:

:i:::~:;~:gFt~ Chairman

Attachments: Exhibit A - Assumptions and Exclusions Exhibit B - Terms and Conditions

CC:

Exhibit C - Preproposal Presentation Package

Rick Gardner, AIA Marlon Blackwell, AIA Josh Flowers, AIA Jeff Bailey, C

Date: 1/Jr,,/;9 7 /

www hbg design


Exhibit A: Assumptions and Exclusions

ASSUMPTIONS Our proposal is based upon the following assumptions:

• We anticipate executing an Owner-Architect Contract with the owner based on AIA Document 8103-2017 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect with terms and conditions modified as mutually agreed. Until such agreement is executed, the attached Terms and Conditions will govern.

• We anticipate that the owner will contract directly with a General Contractor or Construction Manager who will provide pre-construction services, including cost estimating and analysis, scheduling, and advice regarding construction methods during the course of the design and construction.

• The owner will furnish to the Design Team site surveys showing existing grades, buildings, utility lines, setbacks, Limits of Trust, vegetation, wetlands (if any), boundaries and roads and soil testing information. If required, we anticipate that the owner will administer and provide environmental surveys and administer remediation through other consultants contracted directly with the owner.

• Owner will provide soil boring/exploration, topographic and boundary survey, and geo-technical analysis of the building footprint areas as required to inform the design.

• It is anticipated that the local building department will be the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) thus a third-party code consultant will not be required and provided by the Owner.

Designing Experience. ,' MEMPH IS SAN DI EGO , www.hbgdesign

One Commerce Square 40 South Main Street, Suite 2300

Memphis, TN 38103 901-525-2557


Exhibit B: Terms and Conditions

1. ARCHITECT'S RESPONSIBIUTIES The Architect's services shall be performed as expeditiously as is consistent with professional skill and care and the orderly progress of the Work. The Architect's schedule for the performance of the Architect's services may be adjusted as the Project proceeds, and shall include allowances for periods of time required for the Owner's review and for approval of submissions by authorities having jurisdiction over the Project.

The Architect shall not have control over or charge of and shall not be responsible for construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, or for safety precautions and programs in connection with the Work. The Architect shall not be responsible for the Contractor's schedules or failure to carry out the Work

according to the Contract Documents. The Architect shall not have control over or charge of acts or omissions of the Contractor, Subcontractors, or their agents or employees, or of any other persons performing portions of the Work.

Drawings, Specifications and other documents, including those in electronic form, prepared by the Architect are Instruments of Service for use solely with respect to this Project. The Architect shall be deemed the author and owner of such Instruments of Service and shall retain all rights accorded under applicable law, including copyrights

under the Berne Convention . Upon execution of this Agreement, the Architect grants to the Owner a nonexclusive license to reproduce the Architect's Instruments of Service solely for use with this Project, provided that the Owner

shall comply with all obligations, including prompt payment of all sums when due, under this Agreement. The Architect shall have the right to withhold the Instruments of Service in the event the Owner fails to make payments in a timely manner.

Recognizing the relative risks and benefits of the Project to both the Owner and the Architect, the risks have been

allocated such that the Owner agrees, to the fullest extent allowed by law, to limit the liability of the Architect and its consultants to the Owner and to all construction contractors and subcontractors on the Project for any and all claims, losses, costs, damages of any nature whatsoever or claims expenses from any cause or causes, so that the

total aggregate liability of the Arch itect and its consultants to all those named shall not exceed the Architect's total compensation for basic services rendered on this Project. Such claims and causes Include, but are not limited to

negligence, professional errors or omissions, strict liability, and breach of contract or warranty. This limitation shall apply regardless of the cause of action, legal theory, or nature of the loss, damage, liability, or expense sustained or allegedly sustained by the Owner. This limitation shall survive termination or expiration of this Agreement.

2. PAYMENTS TO THE ARCHITECT Payments on account of the Architect's Services and for Reimbursable Expenses shall be made monthly upon presentation of the Architect's statement of services rendered or expenses incurred. For Reimbursable Expenses the compensation shall be the expenses incurred by the Architect and the Architect's consultants. Payments not received by the Architect within 30 days of invoice date will accrue service charges at 1% per month.

3. RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONSTRUCTION COST Evaluations of the Owner's Project budget, preliminary estimates of Construction Cost and detailed estimates of Construction Cost, if any, prepared by the Architect, represent the Arch itect's judgment as a design professional

familiar with the construction industry. Neither the Architect nor the Owner has control over the cost of labor,

materials or equipment. over the Contractor's methods of determining bid prices, or over competitive bidding,

Designing Experience. / MEMPHIS ; SAM D I EGO , www.hbg.des,gn

One Commerce Square 40 South Main Street, Suite 230 0

Memphis; TN 38103 901-525-2557


PAGE 15

market or negotiating conditions. Accordingly, the Architect does not warrant or represent that bids or negotiated prices will not vary from the Owner's Project budget or from any estimate of Construction Cost or evaluation prepared or agreed to by the Architect. No f ixed limit of Construction Cost shall be established as a condition of this Agreement by the furnishing, proposal or establishment of a Project budget, unless such fixed limit has been agreed upon in writing and signed by both parties.

4. MEDIATION Claims, disputes or other matters in question between the parties to this Agreement arising out of or relating to

this Agreement or breach thereof shall be subject to non-binding mediation in accordance with the Construction

Industry Mediation Rules of the American Arbitration Association currently in effect as a condition precedent to arbitration or the institution of legal or equitable proceedings by either party.

Requests for mediation shall be filed in writing with the other party to this Agreement and with the American Arbitration Association. Requests may be made concurrently with the filing of a demand for arbitration but, in such event, mediation shall proceed in advance of arbitration or legal or equitable proceedings, which shall be stayed pending mediation for a period of 60 days from the date of filing, unless stayed for a longer period by agreement of the parties or court order.

Requests for mediation shall not be made after the date when institution of legal or equitable proceedings based

on such claim , dispute or other matter in question would be barred by applicable statutes of limitations. The

parties agree to share mediation costs equally. The mediation shall be held in the locale of Project, unless another location is mutually agreed upon. Agreements reached in mediation shall be enforceable as settlement

agreements in any court having jurisdiction thereof.

5. CLAIMS FOR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES The Owner and Arch itect waive all claims for consequential damages or losses arising out of or relating to the Agreement against each other and against any persons or entities performing services on behalf of the Architect,

including the Architect's consultants, any separate contractor employed by the Owner, the Contractor and any

persons or entities performing Work or supplying materials on behalf of the Contractor.

6. TERMINATION, SUSPENSION, OR ABANDONMENT This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon not less than 7 days' written notice should the other party fail substantially to perform according to the terms of this Agreement through no fault of the party initiating

termination. If the Project is suspended by the Owner for more than 30 consecutive days, the Architect shall be compensated for services performed before notice of suspension . When the Project is resumed, the Architect's compensation shall be equitably adjusted.

This Agreement may be terminated by the Owner upon not less than 7 days' written notice to the Architect if the Project is permanently abandoned. If the Project is abandoned by the Owner for more than 90 consecutive days, the Architect may terminate this Agreement by giving written notice. Failure of the Owner to make payments to the Architect according to this Agreement shall be considered substantial nonperformance and cause for termination. If the Owner fails to pay the Architect for services and expenses when due, the Architect may upon 7 days' written notice to the Owner, suspend performance of services under th is Agreement. Unless the Architect receives full payment within 7 days of the date of the notice, the suspension shall take effect without further notice. If services

are suspended, the Architect shall have no liability to the Owner for delay or damage caused the Owner because of

www hbg design


PAGEl6

suspension of services. If termination is not the fault of the Architect, the Architect shall be compensated for services performed before termination, together with Reimbursable Expenses then due and equitable Termination Expenses. Termination Expenses are in addition to compensation for Basic and Additional Services, and include expenses that are directly attributable to termination.

7. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS This Agreement and the accompanying letter of proposal comprise the entire and integrated agreement between the Owner and the Architect and supersede all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both Owner and Architect. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create a contractual relationship with or a cause of action in favor of a

third party against either the Owner or Architect.

www hbg.desogn


ll s

~ • " ~

~ ~ • i 5 ll !: s

~ • ll s §

~ • § s •

EXHIBIT


Kertis Weatherby

From: Kertis Weatherby Sent: Monday, March 11 , 2019 3:57 PM To: Cc: Subject: Attachments:

FW: DOWNSTREAM-PB: Comments on Proposed HBG Initial Authorization 19-01-14 HBG Authorization for Design Services (dda redline).PDF; ATT00001 .htm

Kertis Weatherby, AIA, LEED AP BD+C Marlon Blackwell Architects

From: Kertis Weatherby Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 3:04 PM To: Ati Blackwell <[email protected]> Subject: FW: DOWNSTREAM-PB: Comments on Proposed HBG Initial Authorization


From: Marlon Blackwell Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 3:03 PM To: Kertis Weatherby <kertis@marlonblackwel l.com> Subject: Fwd: DOWNSTREAM-PB: Comments on Proposed HBG Initial Authorization

Marlon Blackwell, FAIA Marlon Blackwell Architects 42 East Center Street Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Chris Roper" <[email protected]> To: "Paul Bell" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, " [email protected] " <[email protected]> Cc: "John Berrey" <[email protected]>, "Marlon Blackwell" <marlon@marlonblackwel l.com> Subject: DOWNSTREAM-PB: Comments on Proposed HBG Initial Authorization

Attached is the marked up Authorization letter.

We have corrected the address and signature information

EXHIBIT


We have marked up the mobilization fee to $250,000. We are not comfortable fronting $500,000 for startup of design We have removed all references to reimbursable costs. We will not agree to any reimbursable costs. These need to be inside your fee. We have removed Exhibit A. We do not agree to hourly design fees. All fees and expenses need to be quoted for approval We have removed the reference to hiring a third party code consultant that will act as the Authority having jurisdiction. City of Pine Bluff will have Jurisdiction We have marked up the terms and conditions as noted We have modified the exclusion statement regarding on site representation . On site representation as needed should be included in the Architects fee

In regards to the Architects Fee listed on the Cash Flow Schedule. We will agree to 6% fee on Cost of work This needs to be an all inclusive fee. Including the civil engineering and on site representation as needed

Please review these modification and let me know if you have any questions

Thank you

Chris Roper 304 Main Street Quapaw Oklahoma 74363 918-238-3099 Office 573-247-8181 Cellular

2


Sar

acen

Cas

ino

Res

ort

Pha

se S

plit

s

tabb

ies°

FULL

SC

OPE

Pro

ject

Ma

na

ge

me

nt

Clie

nt

Re

latio

nsh

ip

AO

R

SIT

E+

AC

CE

SS

OR

Y S

TRU

CTU

RE

S S

ite

Ou

tdo

or

Eve

nts

Ou

tbu

ildin

gs/

No

t in

Sco

pe

MA

IN F

AC

ILIT

Y

m

Cor

e+S

hell

Gam

ing

Flo

or

Foo

d+B

ever

age

Ho

tel

Eve

nts

Ad

min

istr

atio

n

Tec

hnic

al O

pe

ratio

ns

Phy

sica

l Op

era

tion

s

FF&

E /

In

teri

ors

f\\-

~

m

=i

%T

OT

AL

%SC

OPE

3.00

%

1.00

%

5.00

%

5.00

%

86.0

0%

60.0

0%

40

.00

%

38.0

0%

7.5

0%

7.5

0%

20.0

0%

5.0

0%

1.0

0%

1.0

0%

1.0

0%

19.0

0%

MB

A

HB

G

34.4

2%

65

.58

%

2S.0

0%

75

.00

%

100

.00

%

0.0

0%

0.0

0%

1

00

.00

%

50.1

0%

49.9

0%

43.5

0%

56

.50

%

60.0

0%

4

0.0

0%

35. 0

8%

64

.93

%

41.0

0%

59

.00

%

39.0

0%

61

.00

%

39.0

0%

61

.00

%

39.0

0%

61

.00

%

31.0

0%

69

.00

%

16.5

0%

83

.50

%

16.5

0%

83

.50%

16.5

0%

83

.. 50

%

20.0

0%

80.0

0%

W

DD

ro

~

20

%

25%

35

%

20

%

MB

A

HB

G

MB

A

HB

G

MB

A

HB

G

MB

A

HB

G

62.

2%

37.8

%

43.3

%

56.7

%

25.

4%

74

.6%

11

.3%

88

.8%

25.0

% 7

5. 0

%

25.0

% 7

5.0%

25

.0%

75.

0%

25.0

% 7

5.0

%

10

0.0%

0.0

%

10

0.0

% 0

.0%

1

00.

0% 0

.0%

1

00

.0%

0.0

%

0.0

% 1

00.0

%

0. 0

% 1

00.

0%

0.0%

10

0.0%

0

.0%

10

0.0

%

84

.0%

16.

0%

60.0

% 4

0.0%

4

2.0

% 5

8.0%

18

.0%

82.

0%

80

. 0%

20

.0%

60

.0%

40

.0%

30

.0%

70.

0%

10

.0%

90.

0%

90

. 0%

10.

0%

60.0

% 4

0.0

%

60.0

% 4

0.0

%

30.0

% 7

0. 0

%

SD

DD

C

D

CA

65.5

% 3

4.6%

44

.8%

55

.2%

25

.1%

74.

9%

10.0

% 9

0.0

%

80

.0%

20

.0%

50

.0%

50

.0%

30

.0%

70.

0%

10.0

% 9

0.0%

70.0

% 3

0.0

%

50.0

% 5

0.0

%

30.0

% 7

0.0%

10

.0%

90.

0%

70.0

% 3

0.0

%

50.0

% 5

0.0

%

30.0

% 7

0.0%

1

0.0

% 9

0.0

%

70.0

% 3

0.0

%

50.0

% 5

0.0

%

30.0

% 7

0.0%

1

0.0%

90

.0%

60.0

% 4

0.0%

40

.0%

60

.0%

20

.0%

80.

0%

10

.0%

90.

0%

30.0

% 7

0.0

%

20.0

% 8

0.0

%

10

.0%

90

.0%

1

0.0

% 9

0.0

%

30.0

% 7

0.0%

20

.0%

80

. 0%

1

0.0

% 9

0.0%

1

0.0

% 9

0.0%

30.0

% 7

0.0

%

20.0

% 8

0. 0

%

10

.0%

90

.0%

1

0.0

% 9

0.0%

35.0

% 6

5.0

%

30.0

% 7

0.0

%

10

.0%

90.

0%

10.0

% 9

0.0%


Kertis Weatherby

From: Sent:

To: Cc: Subject: Attachments:

FW: HBG /MBA Deliverables Matrix 20190222 mba-hbg work split matrix.xlsx

See emails below which note the agreement to the fee split from HBG


From: Kertis Weatherby Sent: Friday, February 22, 2019 5:22 PM

To: Paul Bell <[email protected]>

Subject: RE: HBG /MBA Deliverables Matrix

Paul,

Please see the attached for our take on the deliverables matrix.

We will in general have provide design direction and intent for the full project and will provide design review over aesthetics of material selections, documentation and details. We will expect that HBG will provide technical review of MBA drawings and building operations critical elements.

We do not want to have design decisions made with out conversation or without design direction & review by MBA, even where HBG has a primary role for that scope of deliverable.

Please let me know if there area any questions relative to what we are submitting here.

Thanks, Kertis


From: Kertis Weatherby Sent: Friday, February 8, 2019 7:28 AM To: Paul Bell <[email protected] ign> Subject: Re: HBG /MBA Deliverables Matrix

I will certainly work through that.

Sent from my iPhone

Kertis Weatherby, AIA, LEED AP BD+C

Marlon Blackwell Architects

42 East Center Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 479.973 .9121 (w) 315.882.2968 (cell) EXHIBIT


On Feb 7, 2019, at 5:50 PM, Paul Bell <[email protected]> wrote:

Kertis,

I sent a Deliverables Matrix in excel spreadsheet form last week. Since we have come to agreement on the percentage of fee split, can you fill out the deliverables that MBA anticipates providing? If you could just place an "x" in each cell of the MBA column and return to me, that will be helpful in our planning and schedule development. Thanks .

Paul Bell, AIA Principal [email protected]

HBG Design One Commerce Square 40 South Main Street, Suite 2300 Memphis, TN 38103

(0) 901-525-2557 (D) 901- 577-0408 (C) 901-351-6344

www.hbg.design

This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud .com

2


Saracen Professional Services Deliverables Matrix Discipline

EXHIBIT

I 0


Saracen Professional Services Deliverables Matrix DlSdpllne Architecture/ Interiors Others

~ =· ~~-~=====

., .• ,u••·• ~


Saracen Professional Services Deliverables Matrix Ol!dpllne

·----------------------------


Saracen Professional Services Deliverables Matrix Dl>clpllne Architecture/ rntertors Others


Sa

race

n C

asi

no

Re

sort

P

ine

Blu

ff, A

rka

nsa

s A

19.0

00

1.0

1

ID~["'

~ io

~·-1

""" l "

-· ....

L

I JI

OK_J

-455

~ 1

/1/1

9 M

on 1

0/5

/20

3 it • t~

u 12:Jo

'_'._J'

H_j

_,.

_,c

..in

oR

..o

tt

,.,_ ..

.....

Wo

n.h

op

1 D

NI_

, lff

llMf'N

Ol'l

• ~•n

cl e

Ml«

,n

fM -

Si&

ned

len

ero

!Au

lho

rwn

,on

eono

..-1

Pto

tnm

mln

c

f>ro

&r•

m •

nd

8to

c:I.

0,1

a,,m

Dev

eloQ

!nen

l

w--

,.. 2

; °"

""9f

" .,.

....

... "'S

chlcM

I. ,,.,.

..,.., _

. ~

0.,1

11

11

35

.01

Sch

lm11

lc o

..li,'

I

TH

1 D

N,s

n e

nd D

ocu

m-t

ion

DN

li,'

1W

OfM

Nft

3 1

"'1

,_,_

l_..

.._

foo

tl"m

t.

c..

.-~

can

..en

c1a.

..,_

.. ,.

, ...

.. 8M

llch

R

epen

-O

lffl

m.-

""-b

a"'t

len

OO

.~O

MM

,'1

(:h

l

~--&

I\'~

...

...

1,,

. 2

0•i

snen

d0

ocu

men

tllb

on

k1,.

..P

eck•

&•

o..

li,'1

.,.

,.,.

_ -4

W

wne

11c 0

-.,

l"r•

enta

"-"

Tilr

2

App

,w.1

•111

11 l

"la

fl.O

r,,e

nl,.

._P

w\.

er..,~

. ID

o..n

erR

,Y11

W1n

dApp

o-ov

al

, .... T

u.1

/l/1

'Wed

1/1

1/1

t

·-TN

l/1

/11

T

hu

.t/1

0/1

'

ldly

W

•dl/

16

/19

WM

ll/1

6/1

9

15

dl)

'I

Th

ui/

11

/19

w.d

2/e

/1"2

2"'4

ll

Th

ul/

11

/19

Wee1

1/3

0/1

94

•·

Mon

2/4

/11

W

M 2

/tll

t

.... ,.

Th

u2

/1/1

9 T

N-4

/1

8/lt

·-T

hu

2/7

/19

W

ed

3/6

/19

7

,_ T

hu

l/1

/1t

"""1

11

'1

4 "'

4ll

Mo

n3

/11

/19

F

11

4/5

/19

10

lMy

M

on

4/8

/19

M

on4/

8/1

91

1

1-,

TN

-4

/t/1

1

T-

4/1

/lt

12

1w11

W

ed4/1

0/1

9

r,..

.4/1

6/1

91

3

" .. --4

0.0

1 D

N,l

lfl

Dew

lop

men

t 1

13

de,-

?

W-.:

1-4/

11/1

9 F

1111

/29/

19

12

,, ,,

Ow

ner

tHo

w.e

toP

'lo

cNd

l~

y

Wed

4/1

7/1

9 W

ed4/1

7/1

91

•

" ,0 ,CJD

" '' ,.- " 2i7

n 21

-·

,.- " 30 31-,..

" - !! j

;;J!n

37

" " 40-1

41

1

42

i .,-,

T..

, 3

Gem

,nt

Floo

r 11

\d C

11on

o 8

0H

O.•

•tn

1n

d l

)ocy

men

t.lb

on

RM

IOW

,np

~w

~a

Tiw

s.-

..-1

-111

1fff'

CF

'INr.~

10

H

o..r

,., -"

"p-o

vet t

o P,

OC

Nd

w,lh

CO

, fo

, G

1m1n

& f

loo

r

T,e

,4A

Ht.

1u<

1nt1

11nd

8111

0.11

anal

'klO

ocum

•nll

bOn

A1n

de<

lllp

0-..~

• T

\er-4

~-R

N..

_..

,_ .. ,.

Ow

ner

Jrc)

prov

1I to

P,O

CN

d W

l(ti

C01

r,.,

5 a

....

. 11o

om,

& ,.

,..,, .

. H

ottt

Pv

bk

~c ..

in

d B

OH

0.1

111

Ren

der

,np

DN

ilf'

oW

otN

,-7

Tilr

l~

l·G

-~

aM

IN,

t-..

1~

---IO

H.•

nd

S.-

T,e

18E

vent

C.n

te1

. 5pa

1n

dAff

lph,

th11

11,

0.11

1f11

n<10

ocum

,n

R1n

oe<

,np

DM

ii,'

IWo

rbN

pt T

lerl~

I-E

¥M

to.n

.,-•n

d~

OO

QA

R,.,

...,..

00

RH

po

nu

to Q

A C

Om

men

u

11,u

eDM

,snD

ev.O

pmen

tP1e

1.1,

-

DN

l1W

1W

otW

wJ,

t lll

nel 0

-. ~~-

Ow

ner

R1V

1tW

•n

d .l

t)o,

oval

Ow

ner

Nq

uc,

to P

rocN

d M

lt\ c

o,

lo,

Int.

not

F"II

Out

P1e

Ml&

H

-45

.01

C-I

NC

1:l

on

Ooo

umen

ta!M

n

45

o..n

,11N

ot1c

1tof

>l'o

cHd

46

51

'91J

tili1

rl"M

kl .. •T

o&

.oo

nft

nud

-9

yo

.n.t

'lct

v1

1C

on

eult

a

47

M-G

11

din

i~

•To

llC

on

ftrm

N•l

yo

.n.r

<.C

MIC

on

e

48

Wor

i(pe

d(a .

. 1:

DN

p "-

nd

etl

on

t C

Nin

o •

ndud

ell

PIIN

, C

lpt.

F-o

otin

et,.

Ind

R11

tffl

of C

olu

mM

In

d«

WIi

k

49

O

ocum

enll

qo

n

50

Q

AR

,,,,

.w

51

QA

AM

pont

e

52

0-

,v.,

,1,c

at,,

onR

,,,,

.w

53

O

r1w

rio

Ind

SP

KI

d,...

II

HB

G

54

, A

AH

mbl

ePac

k11•

55

jD

lu

ueW

o,k

P1

ek1

&•

56

j

.,~

.. 2°

"9F

ou

nd

lUO

Ntt

otl

lt:P

ll•

.Cl1

11.

~.

, 1

nd

firl

tllf

taJf

Col

umna

•nd

or

WII

II

4-..t

<5

Th

u4

/18

/19

Wee

l5/1

5/1

91

7

!wk

T

hu

5/1

6/1

9W

ed

5/2

2/1

91

9

1-,

Thu

15

/21

/lt

Thu

e/2

lllt

20

ld

1y

F1

15

/24

/19

F

n5

/2,t

/19

21

8w

k1

Th

u4

/18

/19

Wed

6/1

2/1

91

7

1.W

. T

hu

6/1

3/U

Wed

6/1

9/1

92

4

1-,

Thu

1/2

0/l

t Th

u l,

/'2

0/l

t 2

5

""

Fn

6/2

1/1

9

Fft

6/2

1/1

92

6

8..

..,.

M

on

6/2

-4/1

9

Fn

l/1

6/1

92

7

1-..4

1 M

on

l/1

9/1

9

Fn

l/2

3/1

92

9

1-,

Mot

l 1/f

f/lt

Mor

i "2

fl1

.t 3

0

8w

k1

T

u1

8/2

1/1

9M

on 1

0/2

l/ ..

1 w1

1 r .

... 1

0122

119

Mon

t0

/28

/ . 3

3

111,

,ty T

N 1

0/2

9/l

t T

w 1

0/29

/ 1-

4

lwl<

Wed

10

/30

/19

J,..

. 1

1/5

/19

35

2"'4

ll

Wed

ll/6

/19

T

uell

/19

/.3

7

1d

lyW

ed

11

/20

/19

Wed

1l/

20

/ 3

8

1.,

. Th

u U

/21

/U T

hu U

/21

/ at

lwl<

F

n1

l/2

2/1

9T

hu

11

/28

/.

,t0

ld1

y?

Fn

U/2

9/1

9

foll

/29

/19

"1

U1

d1

,-M

on

J/1

1/1

1M

on

5/1

1/2

0

1 da

y M

on

3/1

1/1

9 M

on

3/1

1/1

91

0

-4 M

a

Mo

n S

/U/1

1

Ft1

4/5

/19

10

I ll

lb

Mon

3/U

/lt

Fl'l

-4/1

9/1

9 1

0

28

di,

-M

on S

/11

/lt

Mon

4/1

.15/

11

3"'

4ll

M

on

3/1

1/U

F

nl/

29

/19

10

2d

1,-

. M

on

4/l/

19

J,

...4

/2/1

9"9

1.W

. W

1d

,t/J

/19

T

ue,t

/9/1

95

0

1~

y

W1

d4

/10

/19

Wed

4/1

0/t

95

1

l~y

T

hu

4/l

l/1

t T

h...4

/11

/19

52

Idly

F

11

4/1

2/1

9

Fn

-4/1

2/1

95

3

Idly

M

on4

/15

/19

Mon

4/1

5/1

95

4

31

de,-

Tu

. -4

/ltl

/19

T

u1 1

5/2

1/1

9

:: -i

~;:

::1

1u

on

2\::

~~: ;~

::~

:: :: :~

::~

;: !!

: L

_::

:,~

~~

':,R

.,,,

.w

/: ~::

~~:~~:

~=:~;~~

~:::

I 1=-

-- --

- - -Th

u 2/

21

/19

De

sig

n S

che

du

le

20

19

h

tQu

11

tar ~

2n

dQ

u~

j

lld

Qu

11

te, ~

_J1

n_

LF1

b._

.l..

_M

al_

!-._

Af!t

__

J_

__

M11_

l_

.>un_

l_

_>u

1__

i_

Au1

.L

S.p

~ 4t

h Q

uir

t., ~

lltQ

uer

tt1

L

N

a..--

-1...

____

o.~

n__

__

_l_

F1b

___

_l__

M1,

i- i ~ n

h:

E;r

1;.

,, ~ t ~ lo

___ _

LL

-'

c::

..._

:J

o..

-...

....

_

_ s

....

-,

, .. ,

,,.,

,,.,

.,.

_,..,_

,~

. ❖

..........

.... .

-- -EXHIBI

T

j H

·L.,

· ·-

\

--- -

-,

-h

bg

D

ES

IG

N

2020

j

21\d

Qu1

rtlf

__

L

3rd

Qv

arte

, L

41

t\ Q

ulr

taf

L_

~M

1y

L_

J,.

.n

. ~

.-..,_

Ls.

p 0

ct_

LN

ov

Page

11


Sa

race

n C

asin

o R

eso

rt

Pin

e B

luff

, Ark

ansa

s A

19.0

00

1.0

1

:1r··

-l-

---8

l !

Dr1

ww

,1,1

1n

d~

du

e1

1H

BG

-~

I

Ow_•

-__

,_1 ·

~· l ""

" rt °

" r

,~ 1

d.ly

Fn

5/2

"/11

1 Fl

o 5

/21/

1118

0

1 <1

.ar

Mon

5/2

7/11

1 M

on

5/2

7/t

ll 6

1 ld

.ly

T

.,.5

/28/

111

J.,.

5/2

8/1

91

12

,,j

83

!i

~

~~~ ~ 9 -, 11

jB

__"J "-l

4R 'G

11

.._?.•

H

l j

ao]

"--..I ~ -·~ 85 jE

i ''

J :Hc

...i " " 911

92

"i

.,7

.. J

•w

9'

I 97

~ •• 1 ---4

--j ~ --=i J ~

~

1----

-l --

j ~

Thu

2/2

1/1

9

MH

mb

19

PK

ka&

•

lnu

1W

orl

<P

ack

a11

w~

.. J

Sh.

a 11

nc1

eo,.

Strvc

u•• Ff

•m..

Stan

. •n

d

Ekw

lDt h

tt. •

CM

lno,

Hau

l, E

wef

ft M

el M

lpN

1tl

NtM

O

oC'u

mltf

ltltlO

f'I

QA

R•-

w

QA

RH

po

OH

QA

V•u

l,c,

tio

nR

•"'•

w

Or1

win

&11

ndS

pe,c

1du•

1tH

8G

M1

emb

l•P

1ck

1&

•

l11u

•Wor

kP1c

k1&

•

W~

S-8

5M

I IM

'ld

Co

r.~

:On

lno,

Hot

.II,

•nd

..,,

__..,

QA

R•"

'•w

QA

RH

po

""

QA

V.,

rflc

abo

nR

•-w

DrlW

W'II

P an

d $

pK

I, O

U. It

HBG

MH

ffib

MP

ack1

&•

111.

,.W

OO

.PK

M&

•

w~

.. tl

nti

lrio

l'R

t0u

t-c..

1n

o

Doc

um•n

llD

on

QA

R•-

QA

RH

po

oH

QA

V•1

1fic

1t10

0 R

•-w

....

.. w

o,k

P1

ek1

&•

w~

.. 11

ntar

1orf

lt.O

ut-H

o111

1.'9

e.•n

dE

Yw

'llC

..W

Do

cum

•otl

llo

n

QA

R•l

l'IIW

QA

RH

po

nH

QA

V•1

1fie

atxM

'IR•"

'•w

Or1

ww

,1,1

1n

d~

(I ..

. II

H8

G

MH

ml>

M-P

ack1

&•

111.

,.W

Ofk

PK

ka&

•

80

.0lC

on

a~

Ad

mlt

wln

lto

n

C.1

on

oC

on

iDU

Cb

on

C.1

ino

Su

blt

10

U1

IC

om

plH

on

Ho1

91

[...

.,tC

l,n

tl>

f lr

.dk

np

hrt

h9

1t•

rC

ol\

ltN

cbo

n

Ho

t.I[

....

,\ C

en1 .

. In

d "

"1,p

hlth

Hta

f S

uml.

ln!,

al C

om

pl•b

on

81dl

l)'t

WM

4/1

1/1

1W

Ml/

21

/11

ti..

.._.

W

ff•/

11

/li

J.,.

5/2

8/1

11

1•

lM

W•d

5/2

i/li

lu

•8/•/

tllt

l5

2w

kl

W•d

tl/5

/111

J.

,.8

/18

/19

66

3d1

y1

W•d

8/1

i/li

f1

18

/21

/lll

67

1 di

~

Mo

n8

/2.,

,/ll

l M

on

8/2

"!1

9tl

8

ldly

T

u•8

/25

/1i

Tu

18

/25

/19

6i

Idly

W

ff8

/28

/19

W•d

6/2

6/l

i70

10

1d

•~

WM

4/U

/lt

WM

t/4

/19

lClw

kl

w.c

1•t

11

/1i

J.,.

8/8

/11

11

"

I""<

W

•d8

/1/l

i f.

,.8

/l:J

/19

73

2 ...

...

Wff

8/1

"/l

i J.

,.8

/27

/11

17

•

Jdl)

ll

Wff

8/2

8/l

i F

,14

/30

/19

75

Idly

M

on

i/2

/li

Mo

ni/

2/1

11

78

Idly

T

iall

/3/1

11

Ti.

.9/3

/19

71

lday

W

•dll

/4/1

9

Wff

i/"/1

97

8

'9 0

IIY9

Mon

1/2

1/1

1 T

Iil.i

10

/10

/,_

18w

t,,.,

Mo

n5/

27/1

11

"'11

1/13

/111

22

1""<

M

on

i/H

l/1

9

"'11

1/20

/111

81

2"'4

11

Mo

ni/

23

/11

1

"'1

10

/•/1

98

2

Jd1)

11

Mon

10

/7/1

11

Wlt

d1

0/l

l/1

iSJ

1d

ay

lhu

10

/10

/11

1lh

ul0

/10

/.8

•

121

d-,.

M

on 1

2/2

/11

Mon

8/l

l/2

0

20

wiu

M

on12

/2/1

11

F,,

4/1

7/2

0"2

1 w

k M

on

4/2

0/2

0

F""

l2"/

20

87

2

wk

l M

on.,,

/27

/20

F

,oS

/8/2

08

8

J d•

~•

Mon

5/1

1/2

0 W

ff 5

/13

/20

81

1

1 da

1 T

hu

5/1

"/2

0

Th

u5

/1"/

20

i0

, .. , fn

5/1

5/2

0

floS

/15/

2011

1

1 d.

ly

Mon

5/1

1/1

0 "

4oo

5/1

8/2

01

12

,u

.,.

Mon

•/1

/11

Mon

10

/5/2

0 •

•

..... Uo

n"/

8/11

1 F

r,2

JT/2

04

8

ldly

M

on

2/1

0/2

0 "

4oo2

/10/

2011

5 ,. ...

Uon•/8

/19

F

nl0

/2/2

0"8

1 d

ly

Mor

, 1

0/5

/20

Mo

n 1

0/5/

2011

7

1-.c

l ::· -

,,._,.......,

.,..

.._

__

....

. E

,,,..-

....

,..

.__

---

-

UtQ

u1

r1-,

f•t>_

l

l.

-..

. s..

..-,

De

sig

n S

ched

ule

''"'

... r:=

2r.d

:~

n_

J_

Ju

l _l

_l<d'.

t;".,1

'

J l

....... 't r,

··1

C. ~

0..

..--

<>

flly

MI .

....

. Su

rno

,wyll:o

&,p

•

,0

Ml.

....

tSu

,n,,

w'f

•

•._ I l

~-, , ........

...

j

---r

-4

thQ

u1

1\ .

. S

.p_

L0e

t__

_j_

_Nc

w

\ ... ~.

""

E,,1

., ..

.. M

,._

_ _

...,_ -

l h

lQu

ll\.

, l

F•b

____

l___

_u1

,

t

I 2n

<1Q

u1rt

•r

.,._

Ap,

__

__

.l_

_U

1y

_j Ju

n

'1oi

.. \ ~

hb

g

DE

SIG

N

Jul

L ~:

:.i_

S.p

I

0d

""

'Qui

n.,

L

...

Page

I 2


I

I

JS 44 (Rev 09/19) CIVIL COVER SHEET The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the Iii ing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTR/ICT/ONS ON NJ:'.'(TPAGE OF THIS FORM!

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS

MARLON BLACKWELL ARCHITECTS, P.A.

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff Washington (J;XCEl'T I,\· l IS Pf.AIN1Jl·F < 'AS/:SJ

( C) Attorneys {/·inn Name. Addre.u·, und Telephone Number)

Mark Murphey Henry, Joe Hall, Jack East P.O. Box 4800 Fayetteville, AR 72702 (479)856-6017

DEFENDANTS

HBG DESIGN, INC.; SARACEN DEVELOPMENT, LLC; and JOHN LANE BERREY in his official capacity as Chairman of the Quapaw

County of Residence of First Listed Defendant

(IN US l'I.AIN71FF C' ASES ONLY)

NOTE IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.

Attorneys (If Known/

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an "x·· in One Box Only; Ill. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an "X-- ,n One Box for Plaintiff

0 I U.S. Government

PlamutT

0 2 U S Government Defendant

IV NATURE OF SUIT CON w.&CT

0 I IO Insurance 0 120 Marine 0 I 30 Miller Act 0 I 40 Negotiable Instrument 0 I SO Recovery of Overpayment

& Enforcement of Judgment 0 IS I Medicare Act 0 I 52 Recovery of Defaulted

Student Loans (Excludes Veterans)

0 153 Recover)' ofO,e.,,ayment of Veteran· s Benefits

0 160 Stockholders' Suits 0 190 Other Contract 0 195 Contract Product Liability 0 196 Franchise

REAL PROPERTY 0 210 Land Condemnation 0 220 Foreclosure 0 230 Rent Lease & EJectment 0 240 Tons to Land 0 245 Ton Product L1abihty 0 290 All Other Real Property

QI!: 3 Federal Question

(lf.S. Government Nor u Parry)

0 4 Diversity (Indicate ( '//lumh1p vf Part,e.1· ,n Item Ill)

(!'lace an "X" ,n ( lne Hox Only)

TORTS

PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 0 3 IO Airplane 0 365 Personal Injury -0 3 I 5 Airplane Product Product Liability

Liability 0 367 Health Care/ 0 320 Assault. Libel & Pharmaceutical

Slander Personal lnJury 0 330 Federal Employers' Product Liability

Liability 0 368 Asbestos Personal 0 340 Manne Injury Product 0 345 Manne Product Liability

Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY 0 350 Motor Vehicle 0 3 70 Other Fraud 0 355 Motor Vehicle '.J 3 71 Truth m Lending

Product L1ab11ity 0 380 Other Personal 0 360 Other Personal Property Damage

Injury 0 385 Propeny Damage 0 362 Personal Injury - Product Liability

Medical Malpractice CMLRJGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS

0 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: 0 441 Voting 0 463 Alien Detainee 0 442 Employment 0 S 10 Motions to Vacate 0 443 Housing/ Sentence

Accommodations 0 S 30 General 0 445 Amer w/Disab1ht1es - 0 535 Death Penalty

Employment Other: 0 446 An1er. w/Disabthties - 0 540 Mandamus & Other

Other 0 550 Civil Rights 0 448 Education 0 555 Prison Condition

0 560 Civil Detainee -Conditions of Confinement

V. ORIGIN /1'/a,·ean 'X"inOneHoxOn(11

( For D11•ermy C'a.,e., Onl>) and One Box for Defendant) PTF DEF PTF DEF

Citizen of This State IX I 0 I Incorporated or Principal Place 0 4 04 of Business In This State

C111zen of Another State 0 2 0 2 Incorporated and Principal Place 0 s 0 S of Business In Another State

Citizen or Subiect of a O 3 0 3 Foreign Nation 0 6 0 6 Fore1 n Coun

Click here for Nature of Sutt Code Descrtottons.

FORFE ,w~•~EN,. TY KAN ._y UTff.-.ll STATUTES

0 625 Drug Related Seizure 0 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 0 375 False Claims Act of Propeny 21 USC 881 0 423 Withdrawal 0 376 Qui Tam (31 USC

0 690 Other 28 use 1s1 3729(a)) O 400 State Reapponionment

. • w D • -.;.-·1·:"llli 0 410 Antitrust QI!: 820 Copynghts 0 430 Banks and Banking 0 830 Patent 0 450 Commerce 0 835 Patent - Abbreviated 0 460 Deponation

New Drug Application 0 470 Racketeer Influenced and 0 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations

AH .. K ,• N 1.111. ,1111 IJU ,, 0 480 Consumer Credit 0 7 IO Fair Labor Standards 0 861 HIA ( 1395ft) (IS USC 1681 or 1692)

Act 0 862 Black Lung (923) 0 485 Telephone Consumer 0 720 Labor/Management 0 863 DIWC/DIWW (40S(g)) Protection Acl

Relations 0 864 SSID Title XVI 0 490 Cable/Sat TV 0 740 Railway Labor Act 0 865 RSI (40S(g)) 0 850 Secunues/Commodities/ 0 75 I Family and Medical Exchange

Leave Act 0 890 Other Statutory Actions 0 790 Other Labor Litigation FEDERAL TAX SUITS 0 891 Agricultural Acts

0 791 Employee Retirement 0 870 Taxes (U S. Plaintiff 0 893 Environmental Matters Income Security Act or Defendant) 0 895 Freedom of lnfonnation

0 871 IRS-Third Pany Act 26 USC 7609 O 896 Arbitration

0 899 Administrative Procedure IMMIGRATION Act/Review or Appeal of

0 462 Naturalization Application Agency Decisoon 0 465 Other Immigration 0 950 Constitutionality of

Actions State Statutes

0 I Original O 2 Removed from Proceeding State Court

0 3 Remanded from Appellate Court

0 4 Reinstated or Reopened

0 5 Transferred from Another District (specify)

0 6 Multidistrict Litigation -Transfer

0 8 Multtdistrict Litigation -

Direct File

I

Cifr.,1f.s.E!~i VI. CAUSE OF ACTION i---,;...;.....;;..;..;;..;..,;;.,;......,,i....;;..;;..;;....;;..;..;;..;;..;,i ________________________ _

Brief de~crmtloll of cause b f , · h · · f · · ·

VII. REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT:

VIII. RELATED CASE(S) IFANY

D.ATE LJecember 20, 2019

copyngm mmngement; reach o contract, uniust enr1c ment, tort1ous mtere erence, permanent m1unct1on

0 CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND$ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint

UNDER RULE 23, F.R Cv P JURY DEMAND: ~ Yes ONo

(See 1m·1ruc:lfom'): DOCKET NUMBER

RNEY OF RECORD

FOR OFFICE USE ONL \'

RECEIPT# AMOUNT JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

Case 4:19-cv-00925-KGB Document 1-1 Filed 12/20/19 Page 1 of 1