HomeMy Public PortalAboutPRR 14-1235RECORDS REQUEST (the "Request")
Date of Request: 7/31/14
Requestor's Request ID#: 701
REQUESTEE: Custodian of Records Town of Gulf Stream
REQUESTOR: Commerce GP, Inc.
REQUESTOR'S CONTACT INFORMATION: E -Mail: records @commerce - group.com
Fax: 954- 360 -0807; Address: 1280 West Newport Center Drive, Deerfield Beach, FL 33442
REQUEST: Please provide a copy of the Tynan letter dated May 9, 2014
which was sent to Attorney Sweetapple in connection with Jonathan R.
le.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING REQUEST:
THIS REQUEST IS MADE PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RECORDS ACT,
CHAPTER 119 OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES AND IS ALSO REQUESTED UNDER THE
COMMON LAW RIGHT TO KNOW, THE COMMON LAW RIGHT OF ACCESS; AND
ANY STATUTORY RIGHT TO KNOW (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY
STATUTORY RIGHT OF ACCESS, AS APPLICABLE). THIS REQUEST IS ALSO MADE
PURSUANT TO THE RIGHTS OF THE REQUESTER PROVIDED IN THE FLORIDA
CONSTITUTION.
IT IS REQUESTED THAT THIS RECORDS REQUEST BE FULFILLED IN ELECTRONIC
FORM. IF NOT AVAILABLE IN ELECTRONIC FORM, IT IS REQUESTED THAT THIS
RECORDS REQUEST BE FULFILLED ON 11 X 17 PAPER. NOTE: IN ALL CASES (UNLESS
IMPOSSIBLE) THE COPIES SHOULD BE TWO SIDED AND SHOULD BE BILLED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH Section 119.07(4) (a) (2)
ALL ELECTRONIC COPIES ARE REQUESTED TO BE SENT BY E -MAIL DELIVERY.
PLEASE PROVIDE THE APPROXIMATE COSTS (IF ANY) TO FULFILL THIS PUBLIC
RECORDS REQUEST IN ADVANCE.
It will be required that the Requestor approve of any costs, asserted by the Agency (as defined in
Florida Statute, Chapter 119.01 (Definitions)), in advance of any costs imposed to the Requestor by
the Agency.
I:P/NPR/FRR
04.22.13 FORM
LAW OFFICES
RICHARDSON & TYNAN, P.L.C.
B 142 NORTH UNIVERSITY DRIVE
TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33321
KEVIN P. TYNAN
NOLA M. RICHARD50N
May 9, 2014
Robert A. Sweetapple, Esq.
20 SE 3rd Street
Boca Raton, FL 33432
Re: Town of Gulf Stream
Dear Mr. Sweetapple:
TELEPHONE
(9541 721-7300
Your letter of May 2, 2014 to Jonathan O'Boyle, Esquire, has been referred to me for response.
Please direct any future communication or correspondence relative to the content of this letter to
my office. If you remain as adversary counsel in pending litigation you may continue to
communicate with the O'Boyle firm on those matters without copy to me as long as the
communication relates to said litigation.
At the outset it is important to note that there is no compelling reason to respond to your missive
except as a professional courtesy. The fact that you are "investigating" adversary counsel in
pending litigation does not create an obligation to respond to your assertions. However, since
you are apparently asserting an incorrect premise I write to correct your misunderstanding.
The O'Boyle Law Firm, PC is an interstate law firm with its home office in Pennsylvania. As
you already know Mr. O'Boyle is admitted in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, but is not yet
admitted in Florida. Because of this fact the law firm, in compliance with Florida Bar regulation
and precedent, has a member of The Florida Bar who is partner in the law firm and is the partner
.in charge of the Florida office.
As you already know Mr. O'Boyle was present for an April 10, 2014 hearing and the trial judge
took issue with an out -of -state attorney, who had not been admitted pro hac vice, sitting at
counsel table. Mr. O'Boyle was not present to act as an attorney and only spoke to the court
when he was questioned by the court. While I would agree with you that Mr. O'Boyle, who was
taken aback by the judge's questioning and aggressive attitude, could have been clearer in at
least one of his responses (that he has been admitted pro hac in only one state case but has
appeared pro hac in two federal matters). However, this lack of clarity does not hinder the law
fiim's representation in any manner.
-2-
As to the listing in legaldirectories.com, Mr. O'Boyle has provided no information to that entity
and in any event said directory clearly reflects that he is a member of the Pennsylvania Bar and
does not indicate any membership in The Florida Bar.
After reviewing this matter in some detail with Mr. O'Boyle and the Florida managing partner of
the law firm I can state with no hesitation that there are no valid unlicensed practice of law
concerns and that it appears that your "concerns" are created solely as a methodology to defend
action(s) filed by Mr. O'Boyle's father and/or his corporations who are directly represented by
members of The Florida Bar.
Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance.
Very
P. TYNAN, ESQ.
cc: Client