HE Caen 86 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF CLEVELAND COUNTY eee STATE OF OKLAHOMA TERRAZZO USA AND ASSOCIATES, Dy INC., a domestic for profit corporation, ; = / 7 ° Plaintiff, 5) -ge I@ : W Teer} Hace ow UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA; Hi aliipccngaayandJOENDOET, 3} FEB 12.208 Defendants. } In The Otfies Court Clerk RHONDA HALL PETITION Plaintiff, Terrazzo USA and Associates, Inc. (“Plaintiff”), for its Petition against The State of Oklahoma ex rel. The Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma (“OU”), Flintco, L. (‘Flinteo”), and John Doe 1 (“Doe”)(“OU,” “Flintco,” and “Doe” collectively referred to as “Defendants”), states and alleges as follows: JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1 Plaintiff is a domestic for profit corporation doing business throughout the state of Oklahoma, including Cleveland County. 2. QU isa division of the State of Oklahoma authorized to supervise and construct, buildings pursuant to Okla. Stat. tit. 70, § 3305, and conduets business within Cleveland County. 3. Flintco is a domestic for profit limited liability company and, upon information and belief, is doing business in Cleveland County. 4. Doe is the entity to whom OU either has or will have awarded the contract at issue.5. Pursuant to Okla, Stat. tit, 61, § 122, jurisdiction and venue are proper before this Court FACTS GIVING RISE TO THIS CAUSE OF ACTION 6 On or about November 13, 2015, bids were solicited for work to be performed on the Gaylord Family — Oklahoma Memorial Stadium Expansion and Renovation (the “Project”). ‘The scope of work for the Project included the fabrication and/or installation of terrazzo. 7. The bids were solicited by Flintco, who was acting as construction manager and/or agent for OU. 8. Aspart of the bid requirements for the Project, OU, by and through Flintco, required the bidders to be a member of the National Terrazzo & Mosaic Association, Inc. (“NTMA"). As can be seen by the attached exhibit “A,” there is only one such member in the entire state of Oklahoma. 9. Furthermore, Plaintiff was awarded a contract with OU previously, even though that contract’s bid terms also required membership in the NTMA. 10, Aside from not being a member of the NMA, Plaintiff was the lowest and best bidder for the Project. Il. The Project is a public works project, and is therefore governed by the provisions of the Oklahoma Public Competitive Bidding Act, Okla. Stat. tit. 61, § 101 et seg. (the “Act”. 12, On or about February 5, 2016, Plaintiff was notified that in spite of it being the lowest bidder on the Project, the Project was awarded to another bidder. 13. Plaintiff should have been awarded the contract for the Project as the lowest responsible bidder pursuant to the Act.14, The actions of OU and/or the actions of Flintco, as construction manager and/or agent of OU, are in violation of the Act, making the contract between OU and Doe void. CLAIMI (Temporary RESTRAINING ORDER, TEMPORARY INJUNCTION, AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION) 15, Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-14, above, as though fully pled herein. 16, Okla, Stat. tit. 61, § 122 states: Any taxpayer of the State of Oklahoma, or any bona fide unsuccessful bidder on a particular public construction contract, within ten (10) days after any such contract has been executed, is empowered to bring suit in the district court of the county where the work, or the major part of it, is to be done to enjoin the performance of such contract if entered into in violation of the provisions of this act. 17, Plaintiff meets the criteria for a temporary restraining order, temporary injunction, and permanent injunction because: (1) Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits since OU failed to award the contract for the Project to the lowest responsible bidder; (2) Plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm if the restraining order/injunction is not entered because once the work pursuant to the void contract is substantially complete, Plaintiff is without an adequate remedy; (3) On the whole, entry of the restraining order/injunction protects the publio’s interest because the public is currently being charged more for the Project than it otherwise should be. (DecLARATORY JUDGMENT) 18. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-17, above, as though fully pled herein. 19, Plaintiff is entitled to a declaration that it was the lowest responsible bidder, and an order from this Court directing OU to award the contract for the Project to Plaintiff, WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Terrazzo USA and Associates, Inc., prays that this Court grant judgment in its favor and against Defendants as prayed for herein. Plaintiff further prays for itsattorneys” fees and costs for having to pursue this matter, together with any further relief to which Plaintiff is entitled by law or equity. Collin R. Walke, OBA #22328 H. Craig Pitts, OBA #16291 RUBENSTEIN & PITTS, P.LL.C. 1503 B. 19" Street Edmond, Oklahoma 73013 (405) 340-1900 (405) 340-1001 ewalke@oklawpartn ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF VERIFICATION 1, Sherry Hill, the President of Plaintiff, hereby certify that I have read the Petition and the facts stated therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. On the _||_-th day of February, 2016, Sherry Hill personally appeared before me the undersigned notary and executed this Affidavit freely and voluntarily. Nota’ Ac My Commission Expires: 4.lo. & Commission No. | MOBS4 (SEAL)