IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

MCI COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, INC., 

Plaintiff 

vs. 

SURE SHOT DRILLING, INC., 

Defendant. 

Civil Action No. ________________ 

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff MCI Communications Services, Inc. (“MCI”) for its Complaint against 

Defendant Sure Shot Drilling, Inc. (“SSD”) alleges and states as follows: 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. Plaintiff MCI is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in 

Basking Ridge, New Jersey. 

2. Upon information and belief, Defendant SSD is a Colorado corporation with its 

principal place of business in Fort Lupton, Colorado. 

3. The matter in controversy, exclusive of interest and costs, exceeds $75,000.00. 

Diversity of citizenship exists and this Court therefore has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). 

4. The actions and omissions giving rise to this action occurred in this district. 

Venue is therefore proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(a), (c). 

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

5. MCI is a telecommunications company which provides interstate 

telecommunications services through, among other means a nationwide network of fiber optic 

cables much of which is buried underground. 

Case 1:11-cv-02188-RPM Document 1 Filed 08/22/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 6
6. By agreement with and/or permit from the State of Colorado, MCI possesses the 

rights to install and operate fiber optic cables in the right-of-way of State Highway 72 in 

Jefferson County, Colorado. By virtue of this agreement, MCI is entitled to an undisturbed 

possession of these rights. In accordance with its agreement with and/or permit from the State, 

MCI installed and operates a fiber optic cable in the Highway 72 right-of-way in and around 

Arvada, Colorado. 

7. In accordance with C.R.S. § 9-1.5-105(1), MCI is a member of Utility 

Notification Center of Colorado, the notification center which, pursuant to C.R.S. § 9-1.5-106, 

provides the notices of excavation it receives from excavators to utility owners and operators. 

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(TRESPASS) 

8. MCI repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 

through 7 above as if fully set forth at length herein. 

9. Upon information and belief, on August 23, 2010, SSD was, without MCI’s 

knowledge or consent, and against MCI’s will, excavating with mechanized equipment in the 

Highway 72 right-of-way east of Plainview Road in or near Arvada, Jefferson County, Colorado. 

10. Upon information and belief, on August 23, 2010, without MCI’s knowledge or 

consent, and against MCI’s will, SSD severed MCI’s cable while excavating with mechanized 

equipment as described in Paragraph 9 above. 

11. As a result of SSD’s actions, MCI sustained disturbance to its rights of use or 

servitude, and damage to and the loss of the use of its cable which has resulted in actual damages 

to MCI including, but not limited to, the costs of repairs and the loss of the use of the cable. 

12. SSD’s actions were intentional, grossly negligent and/or reckless and exhibited a 

willful and wanton disregard of MCI’s rights and a conscious indifference to the consequences. 

- 2 - 

Case 1:11-cv-02188-RPM Document 1 Filed 08/22/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 6
WHEREFORE, MCI respectfully requests judgment in its favor and against SSD on 

MCI’s First Cause of Action awarding MCI actual damages in an amount in excess of 

$75,000.00; punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish SSD for its actions and to deter 

such conduct in the future; pre-judgment and post-judgment interest; all costs of this action, 

including attorney fees; and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. 

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

(NEGLIGENCE) 

13. MCI repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 

through 12 above as if fully set forth at length herein. 

14. Upon information and belief, SSD acted negligently in excavating with 

mechanized equipment as described in Paragraph 9 above. This negligent conduct included, but 

is not limited to the following: 

a. Failing to notify Utility Notification Center of Colorado of the specific 

location of SSD’s excavation prior to commencing excavation as required 

by C.R.S. §§ 9-1.5-103(3) and 9-1.5-104.5(2)(a) and applicable 

regulations and industry standards; 

b. Failing to exercise such reasonable care as necessary to protect any 

underground facility in or near the excavation area as required by C.R.S. 

§ 9-1.5-103(4)(c)(I) and applicable regulations and industry standards; 

c. Failing to maintain adequate and accurate documentation, including but 

not limited to photographs, video, or sketches, at the excavation site on the 

location and identification of any underground facility throughout the 

excavation period as required by C.R.S. § 9-1.5-103(4)(c)(I) and 

applicable industry standards; 

d. Failing to protect, maintain and preserve documentation or markings 

indicating the location of MCI’s underground facilities in the excavation 

area throughout the excavation period as required by C.R.S. § 9-1.5-

103(4)(c)(II) and applicable industry standards; 

e. Failing to notify Utility Notification Center of Colorado or MCI and 

request immediate reverification of the location of underground facilities 

in the excavation area when the markings indicating the location of those 

facilities were no longer visible during the excavation period as required 

- 3 - 

Case 1:11-cv-02188-RPM Document 1 Filed 08/22/11 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 6
by C.R.S. §§ 9-1.5-103(3)(a) and 9-1.5-103(4)(b) and applicable industry 

standards; 

f. Failing to notify Utility Notification Center of Colorado or MCI and 

request immediate reverification of the location of underground facilities 

in the excavation area when documentation indicating the location of those 

facilities became lost or invalid as required by C.R.S. § 9-1.5-

103(4)(c)(II)(A) and applicable industry standards; 

g. Failing to cease excavation activities at the affected location when 

documentation indicating the location of those facilities became lost or 

invalid until the location of any underground facilities had been reverified 

as required by C.R.S. § 9-1.5-103(4)(c)(II)(A) and applicable industry 

standards; 

h. Failing to plan the excavation in such a manner as to avoid damage to or 

interference with MCI’s cable as required by applicable regulations and 

industry standards; 

i. Failing to exercise due care at all times, and to take all steps reasonably 

necessary, to properly protect MCI’s cable as required by applicable 

regulations and industry standards; 

j. Failing to determine the approximate location of all underground utilities 

that might be encountered in the excavation area prior to beginning the 

work described in Paragraph 9 above as required by applicable regulations 

and industry standards; 

k. Failing to determine the exact location of all underground utilities when 

the work described in Paragraph 9 approached the estimated location of 

those underground facilities as required by applicable regulations and 

industry standards; 

l. Failing to expose MCI’s cable by hand digging as required by applicable 

statutes, regulations and industry standards before excavating within 

eighteen (18) inches horizontally from the exterior sides of the cable; 

m. Failing to maintain clearance between MCI’s cable and the cutting edge of 

the mechanized equipment to avoid damage to MCI’s cable; 

n. Failing to train SSD’s employees involved with the excavation with 

respect to the applicable statutes, regulations and industry standards 

regarding excavation in the area of underground utilities; 

o. Failing to adequately supervise SSD’s employees and ensure they 

complied with all applicable statutes, regulations and industry standards 

regarding excavation in the area of underground utilities; and 

- 4 - 

Case 1:11-cv-02188-RPM Document 1 Filed 08/22/11 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 6
p. Failing to adhere to all applicable federal and state statutes and regulations 

and all applicable industry standards and guidelines as they relate to the 

protection of underground utilities. 

15. As a result of SSD’s actions and/or omissions, MCI has sustained damage to and 

the loss of the use of its cable which has resulted in actual damages to MCI, including, but not 

limited to, costs of repair of the cable and the loss of the use of the cable. 

16. SSD’s actions were intentional, grossly negligent and/or reckless, and exhibited a 

wanton disregard of MCI’s rights and a conscious indifference to the consequences. 

WHEREFORE, MCI respectfully requests judgment in its favor and against SSD on 

MCI’s Second Cause of Action awarding MCI actual damages in an amount in excess of 

$75,000.00; punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish SSD for its actions and to deter 

such conduct in the future; pre-judgment and post-judgment interest; all costs of this action, 

including attorney fees; and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. 

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

(STATUTORY LIABILITY) 

17. MCI repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 

through 16 above as if fully set forth at length herein. 

18. SSD’s severance of MCI’s cable was a direct and proximate result of SSD’s 

violation of C.R.S. § 9-1.5-104.5(2)(a) which required SSD to provide timely and proper notice 

to Utility Notification Center of Colorado before excavating on August 23, 2010, and SSD’s 

failure to exercise reasonable care in excavating on August 23, 2010. 

19. Pursuant to C.R.S. § 9-1.5-104.5(2)(c)(I), SSD is therefore liable to MCI for a 

civil penalty in the amount of $5,000.00. 

20. Pursuant to C.R.S. § 9-1.5-104.5(2)(d)(I), SSD is therefore presumably liable to 

MCI for any cost or damage incurred by MCI in restoring, repairing, or replacing its damaged 

- 5 - 

Case 1:11-cv-02188-RPM Document 1 Filed 08/22/11 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 6
- 6 - 

underground facility, together with reasonable costs and expenses of suit, including reasonable 

attorney fees. 

21. Pursuant to C.R.S. § 9-1.5-104.5(2)(d)(II), SSD is therefore presumably liable to 

indemnify and defend MCI against any and all claims or actions, if any, for personal injury, 

death, property damage, or service interruption resulting from the damage to MCI’s underground 

facility. 

WHEREFORE, MCI respectfully requests judgment in its favor against SSD on MCI’s 

Third Cause of Action awarding MCI a civil penalty in the amount of $5,000,00, repair costs in 

the amount of $18,966.81; indemnification and defense to MCI against any and all claims and 

actions, if any, or personal injury, death, property damage, or service interruption resulting from 

the damage to MCI’s Cable; prejudgment and post-judgment interest; all costs and expenses of 

suit, including attorney fees, and such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. 

Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Richard L. Hathcoat 

Richard L. Hathcoat CSN: 40714 

CALDWELL HATHCOAT LLC

4440 Arapahoe Ave., No. 110 

Boulder, CO 80303 

Telephone: (303) 945-2750 

Facsimile: (303) 957-2605 

rich@caldwellhathcoat.com 

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 

MCI COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, INC. 

One Verizon Way, Basking Ridge, NJ 07920 

1278852.1:915100:00540 

Case 1:11-cv-02188-RPM Document 1 Filed 08/22/11 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 6