The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About2014-CA-003721 Plaintiff's Exhibit C of Freda De Fosse Depo (01/31/2018)Oiling # 67274913 E -Filed 01/30/2018 04:41:09 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO: 502014CA003721XXXXMB AH STOPDIlZTYGOVERNMENT, LLC Plaintiff, VS. TOWN OF GULF STREAM, Defendant. NOTICE OF SERVICE OF DEFENDANT'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MID -TRIAL INTERROGATORIES WE HEREBY CERTIFY that the original and one copy of the Answers and Objections to Plaintiff's Mid -Trial Interrogatories propounded to Defendant, TOWN OF GULF STREAM, on December 20, 2017 (Nos. 1-20) have been furnished by U.S. Mail and Email to: ROBERT RIVAS, Esquire, Sachs Sax Caplan, PL, 6111 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Suite 200, Boca Raton, Florida 33487 (rrivas o,ssclawfirm.com, dwilkerson@ssclawfirm.com; robertrivas@comcast.net). I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished via Email to all counsel on the attached list, this 30th day of January, 2018. JONES FosTBR JOHNSTON & STUBBS Attorneys Defendant 505 South Flagler Drive, Suite 1100 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Phone: 561-659-3000 Fax: 561-650-5300 By: /s/ Joanne M. O'Connor Joanne M. O'Connor Florida Bar No. 0498807 j oconnor@j onesfoster. corn EX � DEPO DATE FC STOPDIRTYGOVERNMENT v TOWN OF GULF STREAM CASE NO: 502014CA003721XXXXMB AH SERVICE LIST Robert Rivas, Esquire Sach Sax Caplan, PL 6111 Broken Sound Parkway, NW Suite 200 Boca Raton, Florida 33487 rrivas@sselawfirm.com robertrivas@comcast.net dwilkersonnssclawfirm.com Joanne M. O'Connor, Esquire Jones Foster Johnston & Stubbs, PA 505 South Flagler Drive, Suite 1100 Post Office. Box 3475 West Palm Beach, FL 33402-3475 joconnor@jonesfoster.com Robert Sweetapple, Esquire Sweetapple Broeker & Varkas, PL 20 S. E. Third Street Boca Raton, FL 33432 pleadings@sweetapplelaw.com rsweetapple(cr�,sweetapplelaw.com cmiller@sweetapplelaw.com Edward Nazzaro, Esquire Town of Gulf Stream 100 Sea Road Gulf Stream, FL 33483 Tnazzaro g gulf-stream.ora 0 ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO INTERROGATORIES 1. Please provide the full name, address, and telephone number, place of employment and job title of every person who provided information used to answer these interrogatories. ANSWER: In addition to its counsel, the Town responds: The Town's former Administrative Assistant, Freda DeFosse, and former Commissioner, Robert Ganger, previously provided information used to answer these interrogatories. 2. Please describe all steps the Town took to respond to the Public Records Request dated February 7, 2014 and attached as Exhibit A to the Verified Complaint in this action (hereinafter, the PlaintifFs "Request"). ANSWER: The request at issue in this lawsuit (the "Request") was made to the Town by facsimile sent at 4:15 p.m. an February 7, 2014. The Town logged the Request into the Town's public records Iog and e-mailed Plaintiff an acknowledgment letter on February 8, 2014. As the initial acknowledgment sent to Plaintiff indicates, the Town understood the request to seek "Ganger communications 11-01-12 thru 02-07-14:' Specifically, the request sought e-mail communications sent to or received by former Commissioner Ganger. The Town's Commissioners did not have official Town email addresses at the time and the Town was aware that former Commissioner Ganger used a private e-mail account for official Town business. This was not the first public records request the Town had received for public records that may have been exclusively in the possession of former Commissioner Ganger. A number of public records requests were made to the Town for emails sent to or received by former Commissioner Ganger in the weeks and months prior to the Request•. For each of those requests, as with the Request, the Town advised former Commissioner Ganger of the request and asked him to search the records in his possession for responsive public records and to provide those responsive public records to the Town. For Instance, on or about October 20, 2013, former Commissioner Ganger forwarded to the Town the 5 most recent emalls sent from any email account used by him for a public purpose In response to PRR 13-238. Again on or about January 9, 2014, former Commissioner Ganger searched his e-mail account for all public records on his personal computer and forward to the Town 20 responsive emails, in response to PRR 13-305. Upon receipt of this Requests made just one month after the Town responded to PRR 13-305, the Town's former Administrative Assistant Freda DeFosse contacted former Commissioner Ganger to notify him of the Request: asked him to review his e-mail account again to determine if he possessed any additional responsive records not previously produced to the Town and, if so, to provide them to the Town for production to Plaintiff. Mr. Ganger having advised he had no responsive records not previously produced to the Town in response to PRR 13-305, the Town identified those communications that fell within the requested time period and produced those 18 communications to Plaintiff on February 19, x015. 3. Please identify every public records request under Chapter 119 the Town was fulfilling between February 8, 2014 and February 19, 2014. ANSWER: The Town responds that the public records that the Town was fulfilling between February 8, 2014 and February 19, 2014 are reflected in the Town's Public Records Log for 2013 and 2014, the latter being the Town's Trial Exhibit 19. The Town responds that the answer to this interrogatory can be derived almost entirely from the Town's Trial Exhibit 19 by comparing the columns "date of intake" and "date of production," considering any "notes." The burden on the Town to determine this information is the same as that on Plaintiff, particularly given the overwhelming volume of requests. The Town nevertheless states with specificity that the public records requests being fulfilled by the Town between February 8, 2014 and February 19, 2014 include, but are not limited to, the following (the numbers reflecting the number of each request as indicated in the for Ieft column of the Town's Public Records Log, preceded by the year): 13-369 14-563 14-583 14-585 14-588 14-589 14-590 14-593 14-599 14-600 14-601 14-602 4 14-605 14-606 14-608 14.609 14-610 14-611 14-612 14-619 14620 14-621 14.622 14-623 14-624 14-635 14-636 14-637 14-641 14-642 14-644 14.645 14-646 14647 14-648 14-649 14-650 14-651 14-652 14-653 14.679 14-682 14-683 14-684 14685 14-686 14-687 In addition to the foregoing, between February 8, 2014 and February 19, 2014, the Town was caleulating estimates pursuant to Fla. Stat. §§ 119.07(4)(d) and 119.07(4)(x)(3) for producing records responsive to numerous publle records requests made by Christopher O'Hare including as reflected on Exhibit B to the February 19, 2014 correspondence attached as Exhibit 1, 1 4. Please identify all defenses, affirmative or otherwise, the Defendant claims it is entitled to use at the trial of this case. ANSWER: Pursuant to the Court's Order dated January 5, 2018, the affirmative defense of good faith. 5. Please state, with specificity, why Defendant did not produce all of the documents responsive to Plaintiff's Request. ANSWER: The Town understood the Request to seek electronic communications sent to or received by Commissioner Ganger during the stated time period. Because Mr. Ganger used a private e-mail account during the stated time -period and had exclusive access to that account, the Town reached out to him, advised him of the request, and asked that he provide all responsive public records to be produced. All of this was done at a time when the Town was being barraged with dozens of other public records requests by Plaintiff's principal, Martin O'BoyIe, and others, and was being sued with dozens of public records lawsuits. Indeed, there were 21 pending public records lawsuits against the Town at the time it responded to this request, including 5 filed in January 2014 and 3 filed between February 7, 2014 and February 19, 2014 (1 by Martin O'Boyle on the date this request was made, February 7, 2014). Those lawsuits alleged, among other things, that the Town was unreasonably delaying in responding to public records requests. As a result, the Town was endeavoring to respond to the Request as quickly and completely as reasonably possible under the burdensome circumstances intentionally created by Plaintiff and others. The Town represented to Plaintiff that it understood the request to seek, and the Town was producing, "communications" and Plaintiff never advised that it sought any different public records. To the extent the Town omitted to produce a responsive public record, it was entirely inadvertent. The Town further incorporates its answers to Nos. 2,3 and 7 herein. 5. Please state, with specificity, the addresses (physical and e-mail) utilized by Commissioner Robert Ganger for all communications sent and/or received by Commissioner Robert Ganger between November 1, 2012 and February 7, 2014. ANSWER: Email address: rweaneert7a bellsouth.net Physical address: 1443 N. Ocean Blvd. Gulf Stream, FG 33483 7. What acts did Commissioner Clanger perform to assist the Town in fulfilling its responsibility to respond to the Request in compliance with the law? ANSWER: A number of public records requests were made to the Town for sent to or received by former Commissioner Ganger in the weeks and months prior to Gl the request at issue in this lawsuit (the "Request"). For each of those requests and the Request, former Commissioner Ganger searched his e-mail account for responsive, records and forwarded those records to the Town or advised he had no such records. For instance, on or about October 20, 2013, former Commissioner Ganger forwarded to the Town the 5 most recent emails sent from any email account used by him for a public purpose in response to PRR 13-238. Again on or about January 9, 2014, former Commissioner Ganger searched his a -mail account for all public records an his personal computer and forward to the Town 20 responsive emails, In response to PRR 13-305. In response to the Request, made just one month after PRR 13-305, former Commissioner Ganger reviewed his e-mail account to determine if there were any additional responsive records not previously produced to the Town and advised the Town that there were none. 8. When did the Town or Town police first remove Martin O'Boyle's campaign signs during the 2014 municipal election cycle? ANSWER: The Town notified O'Boyle that the placement of his campaign signs In the public right-of-way violated the Town's Code of Ordinances on February 17, 2014. When the violation was not corrected upon notice, the Town on February 18, 2014 removed the signs that continued to violate the Town's Code. 9. Please describe with specificity where the Town stored Commissioner Robert W. Gangees public records between November 1, 2012 and February 7, 2014. if there was more than one location, please specify the type of documentation stored at each location. ANSWER: The Town objects to the request on the grounds that the reference to i°Commissioner Robert W. Ganger's public records" is vague and ambiguous. To the extent that the request refers to public records exclusively to the possession of former Commissioner Ganger, such as public records sent to him at his home or located on a private e-mail account, the Town states that those records were stored by former Commissioner Ganger at his home or on his private email system. The Public Records Act contemplates Public Officials having -custody of their records. See Fla. Stat. § 119.021(2) (c) -(d). The Town manages and stores public records pursuant to Florida Law. 10. Please list all documents or electronic files that were reviewed in an effort to comply with the Plaintiffs public records request, but were ultimately determined to be non- responsive to the request. ANSWER: Objection, The Town objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that this request seeks information pertinent to Plaintiff's cause of action, not to the Town's affirmative defense of good faith. The discovery cutoff in this matter was October 24, 2017, exhibit and witness lists and the Joint Pretrial Stipulation tiled on 7 2017. This request, made mid -trial, is entirely prejudicial to the Town and In no way discretely targeted to the Town's good faith defense, which is the only reason this Court permitted a continuance. See Trial Tr. 11/20/17 at 44:2545:12 ("1 would be looking at all the facts and circumstances at the time that the request was made. We're not talking about going back months or years, but facts and circumstances would mean a few weeks before and a few weeks after the request comes in, okay? So basically within a month of the request."). 15. Are there any public records that Commissioner Ganger sent or received, between November 1, 2012 and February 7, 2014, that the Town did not produce on February 19, 20147 if so, please identify them. ANSWER: Objection. The Town objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that this request seeks information pertinent to Plaintiff's cause of action, not to the Town's affirmative defense of good faith. The discovery cutoff in this matter was October 24, 2017, exhibit and witness lists and the Joint Pretrial Stipulation filed on or about November 9, 2017 and Plaintiff began its case In chief on November 14, 2017. This request, made mid -trial, is entirely prejudicial to the Town and in no way discretely targeted to the Town's good faith defense, which is the only reason this Court permitted a continuance. See Trial Tr. 11/20/17 at 44:2545:12 ell would be looking at all the facts and circumstances at the time that the request was made. We're not talking about going back months or years, but facts and circumstances would mean a few weeks before and a few weeks after the request comes in, okay? So basically within a month of the request."). 16, Did the Town perform an investigation to determine whether additional records should have been produced afler the commencement of this action? If so, what were the results and were they reduced to writing? ANSWER: Objection. The Town objects on the grounds that the interrogatory seeks information protected by the work product and attorney-client privilege. The Town further objects because this interrogatory seeks information that is not relevant to Plaintiffs substantive cause of action and not likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Certainty the interrogatory does not seek information pertinent to the Town's affirmative defense of good faith. The discovery cutoff In this matter was October 24, 2017, exhibit and witness lists and the Joint Pretrial Stipulation were filed on or about November 9, 2017 and Plaintiff began its case in chief on November 14, 2017. This request, made mid -trial, is entirely prejudicial to the Town and In no way discretely targeted to the Town's good faith defense, which is the only reason this Court permitted a continuance. See Trial Tr. 11/20/17 at 44:25-45:12 ("1 would be looking at all the facts and circumstances at the time that the request was made. 'We're not talking about going back months or 9 years, but facts and circumstances would mean a few weeks before and a few weeks after the request comes in, okay? So basically within a month of the request."). 17. Please explain, with specificity, how the receipt of other public records requests affected Defendant's response to PlaintifFs public records request in the instant matter. ANSWER: The Town incorporates its answers to Nos. 21,3 and 5 above. 18. Why has the Defendant produced any further public records responsive to Plaintiff='s Request since this action was filed? ANSWER: Objection. The Town objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that this request seeks information pertinent to Plaintiffs cause of action, not to the Town's affirmative defense of good faith. The discovery cutoff in this matter was October 24, 2017, exhibit and witness lists and the Joint Pretrial Stipulation filed on or about November 9, 2017 sad Plaintiff began Its case is chief on November 14, 2017. This reques;4 made mid -trial, Is entirely prejudicial to the Town and in no way discretely targeted to the Town's good faith defense, which is the only reason this Court permitted a continuance. See Trial Tr. 11!20117 at 44.2545:12 (self would be looking at all the facts and circumstances at the time that the request was made. We're not talking about going back months or years, but facts and circumstances would mean a few weeks before and a few weeks after the request comes in, okay? So basically within a month of the request"). 19. Please identify, with specificity, any and all written correspondence by and between Town Commissioner Robert Ganger and the Gulf Stream Civic Association, Town Staff, the Town Commission, or Architectural Review Board between November 1, 2012 and February 7, 2014. ANSWER: abjection. The Town objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that this request seeks information pertinent to Plaintiffs cause of action, not to the Town's affirmative defense of good faith. The discovery cutoff in this matter was October 24, 2017, exhibit and witness lists and the Joint Pretrial Stipulation filed on or about November 9, 2017 and Plaintiff began its case in chief on November 14, 2017. This request, made mid -trial, is entirely prejudicial to the Town and in no way discretely targeted to the Town's good faith defense, which is the only reason this Court permitted a continuance. 20. Between November 2012 and February 7, 2014, did the Town routinely transmit a copy of Commission Agendas or unapproved minutes to Commissioner Ganger prior to Regular Commission Meeting„ Emergency Meetings, or Special Meetings? ANSWER: Yes. 10 VERIFICATION I have read the foregoing Answers and Objections to Plaintiffs Mid -Trial Interrogatories and swear that the information contained therein, which is not entirely derived from my personal knowledge but, rather, has been collected from corporate records and made available to me by others, is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief based upon my own knowledge and my knowledge of the information made available to me. TOWN F GUL TREAM By: Print: Grog unham Title: Tow Manager Sworn to and subscribed before me in Palm Beach County, Florida this 30,h day of January, 2018. Who is personally known to me — Who produced identification ye of Identi ex r � V OTARY PUB FLORIDA Drier• lar. -Ll 'P0 ^, Id.l tIL44fi . commission expires: S /Z.$ 12-07-D P:V)OCSkl314TDDDS91PLD11T58939.DOCX I1 RENEE' ROWAN DUK NOWY POW - fte N Ftmtda • CwMiden N Os 02ROI My Comm. hp1m Aug 20, 2020 ft*don* t ftVNo)(rAgin