BELTON - Two former political rivals faced off in small claims court Thursday and after four hours of testimony the case was dismissed with prejudice, which means nobody was awarded any money for damages.

By default Luis Cortez, Bell County constable for Precinct 1, is the winner, which makes him 3-0 in political and judicial battles against Lloyd Charping, former Precinct 1 constable.

Cortez beat out Charping for the constable position in the last two Republican primaries.

Charping’s lawsuit claimed Cortez was derelict in his constable duty, which resulted in $1,689 in damages to a rental property.

The judgment by Justice of the Peace Bill Cooke took 10 minutes.

“I hate to see the county have to pay taxpayer money on this stuff,” Cortez said after the hearing. “This is very frivolous.”

Eight people testified including the former tenant, Jodi Potter-O’Brien, Cortez and Charping twice. Less than two hours into the hearing Charping’s attorney, Leo Michaud, quietly collected his belongings and left the courtroom, leaving Charping to represent himself.

When asked why he left his client to fend for himself, Michaud said, “I was doing this as a favor” and refused to elaborate further.

At that point only Charping had testified.

The dispute between Charping and Cortez began on Nov. 9, 2006, when Cortez posted a 24-hour eviction notice on a property owned by Charping.

Charping said Cortez was liable for damage to his rental property because he didn’t return after 24 hours to make sure the tenants had moved.

Charping said he had to have the carpets in the property replaced because cats and dogs were left unattended in the house for four days after the eviction notice. In addition, he said Ms. Potter-O’Brien left the water running when she disconnected her washing machine, damaging a floor and wall.

Charping said he believed that if Cortez had followed up after the 24-hour eviction window had expired the damage could have been avoided.

Cortez and Bill Hartwell, Precinct 3 constable, testified that when serving eviction notices they generally communicate with the property owner as to when or if a follow-up visit is necessary.

“Your honor, I’m confused that that’s the way they do this,” Charping said. “That is not what we’re taught in civil process (class).”

Robert Little, Cortez’s attorney, questioned whether unattended pets could do so much damage in four days and testimony seemed to support that at least the carpets were damaged before the eviction took place.

Charping’s wife testified that she saw trash and roaches in the house a week before the eviction notice was posted.

Judy Reeves, Ms. Potter-O’Brien’s mother, said as she was helping her daughter move she discovered cat and dog feces on the carpet.

In his testimony, Charping said one of the reasons he evicted Ms. Potter-O’Brien was that she had dead cats in her yard.

Ms. Potter-O’Brien testified she left some items behind but said she did not leave any animals. She said that she would have moved out before the 24-hour window closed but when she went to pick up her final load she found a padlock on the screen door and “no trespassing” yellow caution tape around the front porch.

“Do you know who put the lock on the door,” Charping asked her.

“No, I don’t, but you probably do,” Ms. Potter-O’Brien said squarely.

In addition to calling his wife to testify, Charping called two of his tenants, one of whom lives in the home where Ms. Potter-O’Brien had lived.

It is unclear at this time whether Charping will appeal the decision to county court.