Grifter Scum: This is Why We Cain't Have Nothing Nice in Kansas City!

kcur |  After more than two years of litigation, a leadership fight over a Kansas City jazz landmark wrapped up Wednesday morning with nearly two hours of closing arguments.

But the verdict on who will lead the Mutual Musicians Foundation is not out yet. Circuit Court Judge Charles McKenzie said Wednesday he was taking the case under advisement. 

The bench trial started in late November at the Jackson County Circuit Court in downtown Kansas City, Missouri. Tuesday marked the fourth and final day of testimony. 

"Each side is pointing fingers at taking away some of the money or resources of the foundation," jazz historian Larry Kopitnik told KCUR. 

Once the union hall for the Colored Musicians Local 627, the foundation is one of only two National Historic Landmarks in Kansas City (the other one is the Liberty Memorial). These days it is known for its after-hours jam sessions on Saturdays and Sundays.

THE DRAMATIC CONCLUSION

kbia | A judge has delivered a verdict in a lawsuit over control of Kansas City's Mutual Musicians Foundation, and it's a draw.   

Once the union hall for the Colored Musicians Local 627, the foundation is one of only two National Historic Landmarks in Kansas City (the other one is the Liberty Memorial). These days it is known for its after-hours jam sessions on Saturdays and Sundays.

Anita Dixon, who served as the board's vice president, often represented the organization as the spokesperson. But in August 2016, she was ousted after a heated board meeting. In a lawsuit filed in October 2016 and updated in March 2017, Dixon claimed other board members, including chairman James Hathaway, failed to comply with bylaws, took a cut from jam session entry fees, and retaliated against her. 

A counterclaim by the defendants, including Hathaway, alleged that Dixon used foundation funds for her own use, took artifacts, photographs, and other items, and left the foundation more than $8,000 in debt. 

After a bench trial, Circuit Court Judge Charles McKenzie on Friday ruled for the defendants; he denied Dixon's request for payment for damages and for the removal of the defendants as directors. 

But on the defendants' counterclaim of embezzlement and theft, McKenzie sided with Dixon. 

According to the judgment, both parties will be responsible for their own attorney fees, but the costs of the litigation would be paid by Dixon.  

Dixon's response to the verdict: "Of course, sadness."  

She added, "Essentially, we're back where we started. The judge didn't give them what I wanted. And the judge didn't give them what they wanted against me." 

Hathaway's attorney, Roy King, described the verdict as a "summary judgment," short and final. King told KCUR he's advised his client not to comment in the event that an appeal is filed within the 30-day window. 

"If it looks like there's a viable appeal, I will," said Dixon. "But, if not, I'm going to throw myself into making a difference, wherever I go, whatever I do."