South Community Association - Page 11

                                       - 11 -                                         
               In support of their respective positions, the parties each             
          called witnesses to testify about any compensation paid by                  
          petitioner for services performed in the gaming operation.                  
          Petitioner’s witnesses on this subject were Clausing, Parr,                 
          Edward Helton (Helton), Shawna Phillips (Phillips), Karen Cornett           
          (Cornett), and Lulu Blair (collectively, petitioner’s six                   
          witnesses).  Petitioner’s six witnesses generally testified that            
          they were not paid for any services that they performed in the              
          gaming operation and that they believed none of petitioner’s                
          workers was paid for his or her work in the gaming operation.               
          Respondent’s witnesses on this subject were Jessica Seaks,                  
          Melissa Conyer, and Linda Grooms (collectively, respondent’s                
          three witnesses).  Respondent’s three witnesses generally                   
          testified that petitioner surreptitiously paid both them and each           
          other nonofficer worker cash of $65 a day (exclusive of tips and            
          Christmas bonuses) and that one or more of petitioner’s officers            
          instructed them (respondent’s witnesses and petitioner’s other              
          nonofficer/nonsecurity guard workers) not to disclose this                  
          payment arrangement to anyone.                                              
               Our resolution of this dispute turns mainly on a                       
          determination of the credibility of petitioner’s six witnesses              
          and respondent’s three witnesses.  Such a determination                     
          epitomizes the ultimate duty of a trial court, as trier of fact,            
          to determine the truth of a matter on the basis of conflicting              

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011