Judge's order shows Bennettsville farmer documents are invalid

BENNETTSVILLE- An order signed by a US District Judge in Washington DC is helping to potentially shed light on a situation that concerned many Pee Dee residents.

Those residents said they had questions regarding a practice taking place at a store in Bennettsville, where residents paid a $10 fee with the understanding that it would help to potentially include them as claimants in a federal settlement for African-American farmers.

The settlement funding, approved by Pres. Barack Obama in December of 2010, provides $1.25 billion to fund an agreement initially reached between the Agriculture Department and minority farmers more than a decade ago.

The 1997 Pigford v. Glickman case against the U.S. Agriculture Department, was settled out of court in 1999 and was based on claims of discrimination against black farmers by the US Agriculture Department.

Under the agreement, qualified farmers could receive $50,000 each to settle claims of racial bias, and in some cases, could receive up to $250,000.

Over the past several months, some Pee Dee residents began hearing about the newest round of claim filing and many said they heard that an area business would help them in becoming a part of the settlement.

Many of those residents said they noticed a large influx of people frequenting Marshall's Travel & Training at 232 E. Main St. in Bennettsville, and said they heard that the business was offering assistance in the African-American farmer settlement.

The owner of the Bennettsville business, Marshall Muhammad, said he obtained the paperwork that he was offering customers, with the help of a legal researcher, Ms. Thedford Rowser-Bey and said additional copies of the documents were available at the researcher's website, www.justiceandtrust.com.

On that site, Rowser-Bey describes herself as the owner and founder of the Office of Justice and Trust, which she says is a licensed legal research company.

In addition, Rowser-Bey claims affiliations with the National Black Farmer's Association, where she says she "is known as the settlement's research consultant."

The NBFA has played an instrumental role in the settlement process and its President, Dr. John Boyd Jr., wrote the bills that would eventually be passed into law by Pres. Obama.

Boyd said that not only is he adamant that no one should have to pay to take part in the filing process, but also says he's never even met Rowser-Bey, who claims to work on behalf of the NBFA.

"I wrote the bill, I wrote all of the bills in fact and I haven't had anybody by that name doing any kind of research for me," Boyd said.

According to those working closely with the case though, and according to legal documents filed in 2007, those who would be eligible for compensation were those who were part of the original group but were considered late filers.

A 2007 opinion by US District Court Judge Paul L. Friedman, District of Columbia, essentially states that anyone promising to include new claimants or appeal on the behalf of new claimants, is not familiar with the process.

"There were two important deadlines for persons who wished to apply to become part of the Pigford settlement. The first deadline was the claims filing, deadline: October 12, 1999. Those who missed that deadline were allowed to submit a request for permission to file a late claim. The deadline for submitting a request for, permission to file a late claim was September 15, 2000. Both of these deadlines are final under the law of this case. Anyone who states otherwise or interprets the Court's Orders, Opinions, or the law under which this case was brought as saying otherwise is simply incorrect. To repeat: This case has been closed to new applicants for approximately seven years," the motion states.

Mrs. Rowser-Bey said that the paperwork being filed in Bennettsville, and in other parts of the country, represents people signing up to appeal to Judge Friedman's final order and she said that those signing the paperwork and paying the fee, are not signing up for compensation through the settlement.

Rowser-Bey said that if an appeal is granted, that those people who filled out the forms would potentially be granted money.

"The neutral parties are not neutral at all. They all work for the USDA according to a document filed and signed in October of 1999 by Rosaline Gray, who worked for the USDA at that time. In that document it acknowledged that the parties were not neutral, and were in fact lawyers for the USDA," Rowser-Bey said in a telephone interview.

According to another motion filed recently by Judge Friedman though, any appeals sent by Rowser-Bey on behalf of individuals, are essentially invalid.

"Although each copy of this document is signed by a different individual or set of individuals, it appears that the content of the document was prepared by one person, Ms. Thedford A. Rowser-Bey, an individual who styles herself a "legal researcher" and who has repeatedly attempted to inject herself into this case and its predecessors, Pigford v. Glickman, Civil Action No. 97-1978, and Brewington v. Glickman, Civil Action No. 98-1693," the Aug. 2011 order reads.

The document goes on to say that the same documents that are being signed in Bennettsville, have been submitted previously from people in other parts of the country and that they have no bearing on the outcome of the case or whether anyone will receive compensation.

"The Court has been informed that a large number of peop1e have paid Ms. Rowser-Bey a fee in exchange for her submission of a copy of her "Pro Se Petition/Objection" on their behalf. The Court is concerned that any money paid to Ms. Rowser-Bey by potential class members in this case may have been wasted because the "Pro Se Petition/Objection" drafted by Ms. Rowser-Bey achieves nothing at all for those individuals. It does not present a coherent objection to the proposed settlement agreement, nor does it serve as a means of "signing up" for this case," it continues.

The judge goes on to say that Rowser-Bey does not have a law degree and that he feels she is not familiar enough with the case to be able to provide legal aid.

"While potential class members are entitled to seek assistance where they please, the Court advises them that Ms. Rowser-Bey is not a lawyer, and she has previously caused

widespread confusion among Pigford litigants by "misstat[ing] the legal importance of various Orders and Opinions issued by this Court, and misinterpret[ing] the meaning of words and

sentences in those Orders and Opinions." Pigford v. Johanns, 505 F. Supp. 2d 174, 175 (D.D.C.

2007)," the order states.

It continues, "Based on her submissions in this case and in Pigford v. Glickman, it does not appear that she understands the law or the facts involved in either matter. Her interference with the

proceedings in Pigford v. Glickman was so severe and persistent that the Court was forced to bar her from filing documents in the case. See id. It is highly unlikely that she can be of any help to potential claimants in this matter."

Boyd said that in order to avoid any confusion or loss of money, those interested in getting more information on the case or those trying to determine if they have a claim, should go through the proper channels set up by the federal government.

Citizens interested in a filing claim under the provisions of the 2008 FarmBill/2010 Claims Restituion Act pertaining to the Pigford v. Glickman case can call the black farmer case hotline at 1-877-810-8110 or visit the website for still more information at www.blackfarmercase.com.

By both phone or online they can learn the background of the case, how to obtain a claim form, discover the names of law firms that have been contracted to provide free consulting to potential plaintiffs in the case and learn when meetings offering free legal on the case will be held in their area.

 Five meetings are scheduled in Florence from March 5 to April 5, but several are already filled.

Reservations can be made by phone or online.