T-R FILE PHOTO The trial for the civil lawsuit filed by Perfection Property Restoration/First Onstie against Marshall County over fees related to the courthouse restoration project is now scheduled for Sept. 14, 2026.

The federal lawsuit against Marshall County by Perfection Property Restoration, now known as First Onsite, was rescheduled for trial on Sept. 14, 2026.

Brought to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa Central Division in June 2024, Perfection Property, a business in Illinois hired to restore the courthouse following the 2018 tornado, is seeking $2.2 million and more than $250,000 in fees for work done. The lawsuit claims there was a breach of contract by the county.

The civil case was supposed to go to trial on Nov. 17. However, in September the county found and produced nine boxes of project documents. With there only being two months before the original trial date, the discovery of the boxes impacted pretrial preparation and expert depositions.

Also in a Dec. 19 federal court document, issues with the exterior paint on the Marshall County Courthouse were a focus. It states in October, Marshall County Buildings and Grounds Director Lucas Baedke noticed that paint was chipping and some areas did not have adequate surface preparation.

The court concluded that a new discovery deadline of July 20, 2026 was to be set for the purpose of investigating issues with the exterior paint. The discovery is limited to site inspection, written statements regarding the paint, supplementation from paint experts and depositions.

Another matter which Perfection/First Onsite brought to the court was alleged fraud by Auditor/Recorder Nan Benson, which was determined to be “misplaced.” A district judge stated Benson said she “did not care” about the extent of her authority when she signed paperwork because she wanted work on the courthouse to begin.

“The court denies this request,” the judge wrote. “It is far too late to amend the scheduling order to add new claims or parties . . . In any event, Perfection does not have a viable fraud claim. . . . Nothing Benson said or did prevented Perfection from understanding that it needed board approval for the Insurance Work Authorization or trying to obtain that approval through federal board action.”