Contractor Responsible for New Dallas Black Dance Theatre HQ Sues For Defamation

By Jim Schutze Wed., May 5 2010 at 10:39 AM

Categories: Schutze

Pin It

Ann Williams

The contractor on the new headquarters of Dallas Black Dance Theatre is suing DBDT founder and artistic director Ann Williams and her daughter for 10 million bucks for "tortious interference" (messing with his money) and defamation. If it doesn't settle early, this could be an intriguing window on DBDT, a very closely held institution dominated by one family.

I spoke with Williams Monday. She hadn't seen the suit yet and demurred from comment other than to say, "He was the construction guy with the city that built that building. We were the ones that told the city about all the things that he didn't do. I guess he's angry at us because we turned him in."

Yup. He is angry. Vince Fudzie, CEO of Triune, says in the suit, which is after the jump, that he finished the renovation of the old Moorland Gymnasium in the Arts District project on time -- in spite of difficulties with Williams, who, he says, threw a lot of change orders at him.

The lawsuit presents letters from the city and the architect backing his story. The letters say Triune finished the job on time and the right way in spite of "unforeseen conditions and owner-initiated changes."

In spite of that, according to the suit, Williams and her daughter, Angelia, slimed Fudzie with the city of Dallas and in the community. Take a gander at some of the e-mails below. Looks like Williams's daughter even tried to get Fudzie bounced from a bachelor auction.

More to the point, Fudzie claims in the suit that Williams mother and daughter got in the way of money the city owed him for all the change-orders.

Fudzie is a guy with a pretty serious resume for work his company had done here and in other cities. I met him some time ago. I know he's smarter than most people, because he went to the University of Michigan. Williams, of course, is a local arts community icon with serious clout among the power elite.

Could be a good fight.
Vince Fudzie v Ann Willilams and Dallas Black Dance Theatre

E-Mails From Ann Williams and Daughter

Letter of Recommendation From Robert Durham

Like this Story?

Sign up for the Weekly Newsletter: Our weekly feature stories, movie reviews, calendar picks and more - minus the newsprint and sent directly to your inbox.

Write Comment

Email to Friend

Print Article

Related Content

This lawsuit is frivolous. Behavior such as this is typical behavior from Vince Fudzie. I am an attorney that his company (TMV L.L.C.) filed three similar claims against. At the end of the day, I won a judgment for over $130,000 for my client and got his claims against me thrown out of court after one of his attorneys (Marlon W. Frazier) ended up disbarred. The simple truth is that NOBODY should hire this guy. Vince Fudzie and TMV L.L.C. are scum.
As a former contractor I know the crap that this guy endured. When owners and architects screw up they always try to blame the contractors.
A company's reputation is its BRAND. If it requires placing the facts before a REPUTABLE JUDGE, then it is well worth the effort.
Someone is brave enough to take on someone for not telling the truth.Defamation, means you said,something about a Person, that could cause them harm,and you held it out as being true. and told it to others.
Buzzoff: Generally those that use the phrase "artsy-fartsy" intend it as a put-down of those arts they neither understand nor appreciate. The implication is that artists and those who love the arts are somehow less serious, less "manly" than those of us who know better and spend our energies more wisely. It's generally regarded as an insult. I know, despite your gratuitous swipe at "the average Dallasite" and culture that is "not carried by a TV network" -- what kind of culture would THAT be?? -- that you would not consider yourself among this class of people, nor would you intend a put-down to the many knowledgeable patrons who have attended and enjoyed performances of the Dallas Black dance Theatre. Perhaps if you paused and gathered your thoughts before you blogged, your point might have been a little more clear.
Anyone with legal knowledge want to weigh on Williams' negative recommendations? Particularly what the legal standard or differentiator is between honest-to-goodness recommendations and libelous statements? I mean, it's apparent to me that she's a pain in the ass IMO. But does what she did rise to the level of "tortious interference?"
Well it *was* designed for DBDT, and a dance company has specific needs just like any other kind of company. So I would say yes, she does have the right to request changes that make since to the future use of the building. Also from what I understand it was her building before the city took it over in order to renovate it as it's a historic building and a part of the arts district.
Maybe Ms. Williams feels she has earned the right to make changes in the design and construction of city property.
FrontRowSeats, It's not her building. It's owned by the city now.
I've been there and thought to myself, "Wow for such a new renovation it's hard to believe some of the things that are falling apart" and this is nothing to do with wear and tear. If you don't do a the job right maybe you don't deserve millions?
As a architect, I've done work with the City of Dallas (and various related bureaucracies in the area) in the past, and, hopefully, it will always stay in my past. I do feel for any contractor's that have to deal with them.
Subsets and minorities aside, I'd like to hear an answer to anon's question.
Bob - by minority, I don't mean nonwhite. There are other minority-type clients I've had to deal with. Maybe "subset" or "niche" might be a better word. And heaven forbid I should make a statement about the links between the City of Dallas/DART/DISD contracting! I don't think I'm pointing out anything that hasn't been mentioned multiple times concerning how the City/DART/DISD/County handle their contracting, whether it's construction or consulting. It is a hotbed of nepotism, good-ol'-boy-ism, and "what do you give me if I give you this contract"-ism. See Willis Johnson. As far as religion is concerned, Wanna Know nailed it. The only serious problems I've ever had with clients were the City and religious groups, whether it be a church or evangelist.
Bob, I can't endorse Sanguine's comments about minority owners, that has not been my experience, but I will say that it is always difficult to build for governmental owners. It's difficult to contract with a party that can breach the contract then hide behind sovereign immunity. And religious institutions are about the same....for reasons I have yet to fathom. I had an owner's rep for one of the large religious hospitals in Dallas warn me at a pre-construction meeting that "no contractor had ever made a dime on one of his project, and none ever would."
I'm honestly just confused: If it's "her" building, why are taxpayers redoing it for her? If it isn't "her" building, why is she allowed to generate change orders that will cost taxpayers more money?
So, Sanguine, you support this guy's claims of defamation against two individuals and their organization (based, I would guess, on zero actual knowledge of the facts), yet you do this by defaming the entire municipal government (and its employees) as well as all nonwhite and all religious organizations (based, I would guess, on the same actual knowledge of the facts). So, what you are saying is that a construction contract is only trouble-free when the contractor has to deal only with private, white, atheist organizations? Did you really mean to be as silly as you sound?
Doing work for the city is a pain. Doing work for the city AND an individual group is a double pain. If that group is minority or religious, it's BEYOND a painful situation. Good for this guy to speak up - hopefully he will be successful if the facts back him up. But this will be the last city contract he will get, that's for sure. Or DISD or DART or County deal. They take care of their own.
At some point, it was said and done. Game over. But it was after that point that the Williamses tried to get other people not to hire Triune.
@Bill: Artsy-fartsy -- something the average Dallasite perceives as culture but not carried by a TV network.
Bacon, having built about 20 commercial buildings during the 80's, I can tell you that the owners, operators or managers of single purpose facilities often try to customize the facility on the fly during construction. Change Requests come fast and furious, with little regard for their effect on efficiency or budget. Change Orders are issued to change the price or duration of construction in response to requests by the Owner or Architect for changes in the plans or specifications. Change Orders are also issued as the result of claims made by the Contractor due to errors in the design or (in limited situations) unforeseen conditions in the work. Renovation projects often have unforeseen conditions because often there are no plans, or unreliable plans, for the existing structure.
Buzoff, Please define "artsy-fartsy."
I'd like to see some examples of what sort of changes Williams was requesting.
Let's see -- Smart guy with good reputation before versus artsy-fartsy with Dallas elite backing. Poor bastard does not stand a chance in this city!