The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal AboutPRR 16-2123From: Jonathan O'Boyle (mailto:joboyle@oboylelawfirm.com] Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 12:28 AM To: Bill Thrasher <bthrasher@gulf-stream.org>; OConnor, Joanne M. <JOConnor@jonesfoster.com> Cc: Ken Drake <kendrake@dldlawyers.com>; Jonathan O'Boyle <joboyle@oboylelawfirm.com> Subject: RE: GS # 2117 (Re: Followup on Records request Sweetapple Bar Report 11/26/14)_amended Thank you Mr. Thrasher. I have a follow-up question though to the Custodian or anyone the Town so directs. Are there records related to the 11/14 Sweetapple Report or not? Are there documents the Town claims are not public records or is the Town saying that Bob prepared an oral report without creating any writings. I feel that it is good policy to give a requestor some insight on why no records were created. I have entertained the idea that Bob's original report was oral but I am no so dull as to buy that a report was prepared without a single record. So now I will ask for any and all communications to or from the Town and Sweetapple's firm its employees agents shareholders officers associates or his person regarding that 11/26/14 entry about a report regarding the Bar. So at the very very minimum there should be records reflecting the order from the Town to Sweetapple to make such a Bar Report, communications about when and where Sweetapple was to deliver that report orally and who was involved, and communications from the Town to Bob and visa versa about the original request (i.e. whether records exist). I beg, please do not make me send in 500 requests with language tweaked in every which way to cover every possible scenario. I beg for a human response that makes sense and that avoids a lawsuit where documents are found to be records and those records responsive and the excuse is mistake. Also, to the Custodian, I would like to supplement my Ganger request. I would like all emails between he and anyone @flcities.com (the surlink for the Florida League of Cities) for the last six months in electronic format, like the original files. To the extent they cannot be reproduced with ease, I would like to inspect the email account of rwganeer@bellsouth.net. I would also like all records which concern the "political insider" Mr. Ganger references in his Jan. 17, 2016 email with the League of Casey Cook as well as those records which concern the phrase "achieve our objectives." The Town can forgo the aforementioned records requests if they want to tell me who the political insider is and or what the Town's objectives are. Thanks a bunch. Jonathan O'Boyle, Esq., LLM. Licensed In Pennsylvania* Licensed In New Jersey* Licensed in Florida* The O'Boyle Law Firm, P.C. www.oboylelawfirm.com Pennsylvania Office 1001 Broad St. Johnstown, PA 15906 Tel: 814-535-5175 Fax: 215-893-3641 ioboyle@obovlelawfi rm.com New Jersey Office 30 Grove St. Haddonfield, NJ 08033 Tel: 814-535-5175 Fax: 215-893-3641 jobovle@oboylelawfirm.com Florida Office 1286 West Newport Center Drive Deerfield Beach, FL 33442 Office: 954-570-3533 Fax: 754-212-2444 jobovle@obovlelawfirm.com IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication, unless expressly stated otherwise, was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax -related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax -related matter(s) addressed herein. ----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: THIS E-MAIL IS MEANT FOR ONLY THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OF THE TRANSMISSION, AND MAY BE A COMMUNICATION PRIVILEGED BY LAW. IF YOU RECEIVED THIS E- MAIL IN ERROR, ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS E-MAIL IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY OF THE ERROR BY RETURN E-MAIL AND PLEASE DELETE THIS MESSAGE FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR COOPERATION. From: Scott Morgan Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 9:18 AM To: Joanne OConnor ; Robert Sweetaople Subject: Response to Bar Complaints Joanne & Bob, Attached is Smith, Tozian's response to our Bar complaints against Ring, Taylor, Mesa and Witmer. Please advise how you feel we should respond. I believe we have 10 days to do so, or to request an extension of time. Regards, Scott W. Morgan (561) 752-1936 Smith, 2ozian, Danief & Davis, 1�'- .A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW DONALD A. SMITH, JR. SUITE 200. 109 N. BRUSH STREET SCOTT K YN H. TAMPA, FLORIDA 33802 DEBRA J. AI IS DANIEL PHONE 817 DEBRA W. ( )273-0083 TODD W. MESSNER FAX (813) 221-8872 dmilMoYan oom www.0Crldotltlabaitlelense rn November 17, 2014 PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL Maura Canter, Esquire, Bar Counsel The Florida Bar Attorney Consumer Assistance Program 651 East Jefferson Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2300 Re: Inquiries/Complaints of Mr. Scott W. Morgan against William F. Ring, Jr., Esquire, The Florida Bar File No. 2015-50,283(17D); Nickalaus B. Taylor, Esquire, The Florida Bar File No. 2015-50,426(171); Giovani Mesa, Esquire, The Florida Bar File No. 2015-50,427(17E); and Ryan L. Witmer, Esquire, The Florida Bar File No. 2015-00,223(2A) Dear Ms. Canter: As you know, our office has been retained by William F. Ring, Jr., Esquire, Nickalaus B. Taylor, Esquire, Giovani Mesa, Esquire, and Ryan L. Witmer, Esquire, regarding the above -referenced inquiries. We sincerely appreciate your courtesy in allowing the additional time to respond pursuant to Rule 4-8.4(g). The requested Certificates of Disclosure are enclosed. For the reasons set forth herein, we respectfully submit that these files should be closed at this time. At the outset, we note that the complaints are signed and filed by Scott W. Morgan, in his official capacity as Mayor, on behalf of the Town of Gulf Stream ("Town"). On information and belief, the Town commissioners did not vote at a properly noticed public meeting whether Mr. Morgan was authorized to take this formal action on behalf of the Town. We understand that under section 286.011, Florida Statutes, a formal action taken in violation of the public meetings act may be void ab initio. We also note that Mr. Morgan is admitted to practice law in Pennsylvania, where his membership record reflects "Active" and "Out of State." Notwithstanding the questionable validity of the instant complaints, the above-named attorneys specifically deny each and every alleged violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct, as well as any suggestion of impropriety in the formation and operation of The O'Boyle Law Firm ("Firm") from January 2014, to present. As confirmed in Attorney Kevin P. Tynan's letter dated May 9, 2014, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A, the Firm is an interstate law firm with its home office in Pennsylvania. Jonathan O'Boyle is domiciled in Longport, New Jersey, and admitted to practice law in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, but not yet in Florida. Mr. Tynan, who focuses his practice on Professional Responsibility for Florida attorneys, was hired to assist Maura Canter, Esquire, Bar Counsel November 17, 2014 Page 2 Mr. O'Boyle and Florida licensed Attorney Ryan L. Witmer in preparing a partnership agreement that would comply with the guidelines established in Florida Bar v. SavitL 363 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 1978). Mr. Witmer subsequently relocated to New York and transferred his ownership interest in the firm to Florida Attorney William F. Ring, Jr. on June 30, 2014. Mr. Tynan has continued to be involved with the Firm and has been consulted and provided his guidance and opinions on a variety of topics, including attorney fees and personnel issues. Substantive responses specifically refuting allegations of shared client confidences, an improper feeder arrangement, improper public records lawsuits against the Town and State of Florida, excessive fees and aiding and abetting the unlicensed practice of law, may be filed in the future. We respectfully submit, however, that such responses are not appropriate at this time in light of hotly contested and highly publicized pending civil litigation raising the same issues. As reflected in Mr. Morgan's original Bar Inquiry/Complaint and subsequent filings, the latest of which was received just today, the allegations of misconduct are the same as those at issue in various pending civil lawsuits. Indeed, the same evidence Mr. Morgan proffers in support of his Bar complaints has been introduced in one or more of the pending civil cases. Such filings include the Affidavit of Joel Edward Chandler, dated October 27, 2014, which Mr. Morgan filed with the Bar under his cover letter dated October 28, 2014, and which your office transmitted to the undersigned under cover letter dated November 7, 2014. Mr. Chandler is the former Executive Director of Citizen's Awareness Foundation, Inc. ("CAFI"), which currently has a breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty suit pending against Mr. Chandler. The filing of the present inquiries while several related lawsuits are pending is problematic for several reasons. First, it is not appropriate to try complex civil issues in an administrative proceeding while judges, magistrates and potentially juries are simultaneously considering the same issues. A Florida Bar disciplinary investigation is not the appropriate venue to adjudicate civil disputes. See Florida Bar v. Walton. 952 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 2006, rehearing denied) quoting Florida Bar v. Della -Donna 583 So. 2d 307 (Fla. 1989) ("Disciplinary actions cannot be used as a substitute for what should be addressed in private civil actions against attorneys. They are not intended as forums for litigating claims between attorneys and third parties."). The Court has also repeatedly explained that "the purpose of an attorney disciplinary proceeding is the protection of the public, not the vindication of private rights." Tyson v. Florida Bar, 826 So. 2d 265 (Fla. 2002). Such simultaneous litigation not only results in an inefficient use of resources, but may also lead to contrary factual determinations. Second, by alleging the exact allegations in an Inquiry/Complaint as in a pending civil matter, the complainant is attempting to compel the respondents to provide evidence and statements in defense of their law licenses that might not otherwise be discoverable under discovery obligations in the pending civil litigation. As such, Bar complaints filed during the pendency of related civil litigation may provide the complainant a tactical advantage, both in discovery and in forcing respondents to defend the same allegations on two fronts. Third, permitting simultaneous prosecution of disciplinary allegations alongside civil complaints allows the complainants to utilize Florida Bar proceedings to harass the opposing party and exert undue pressure. As you know, "the purpose of the rules can be subverted when they are invoked Maura Canter, Esquire, Bar Counsel November 17, 2014 Page 3 by opposing parties as procedural weapons." See Preamble, R. Regulating Fla. Bar. The Bar has dismissed Bar inquiries in the past based on pending related civil litigation. We submit the same is appropriate in this case to preclude any attempt to gain leverage in the pending civil matters. The issues raised by Mr. Morgan are currently being considered in more than one civil case. The trial courts are in a better position than The Florida Bar to evaluate the weight of the evidence presented and to test the credibility of the witnesses. All parties' interests will be duly determined in the appropriate legal jurisdiction. Concurrent consideration through the Bar disciplinary process is not warranted and the above -referenced inquiries should be dismissed. In the alternative, the disciplinary proceedings should be deferred in accordance with Rule 3-7.4(e), Rules Regulating The Florida Bar and Standing Board Policy 15.55. As always, thank you for your courtesy in these matters. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Since , S ozi , Esquire SKT/an Enclosures: Per above cc: Mr. Scott W. Morgan William F. Ring, Jr., Esquire Nickalaus B. Taylor, Esquire Giovani Mesa, Esquire Ryan L. Witmer, Esquire LAW OFFICES RICHARDSON & TYNAN, P.L.C. O 1 A2 NORTH UNIVERSITY DRIVE TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33321 KEVIN P. TYNAN NOLA M. RICHARDSON May 9, 2014 Robert A. Sweetapple, Esq. 20 SE 3rd Street Boca Raton, FL 33432 Re: Town of Gulf Stream Dear Mr. Sweetapple: TELEPHONE f9!14l 72 1.7300 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 (tearing and the trial judge took issue with an out-of-state attorney, who had not been admitted pro hnc 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 bac in only one slate case but has appeared pro hnc in two federal matters). However, this lack of clarity does not hinder the law firm's representation in any manner. EXHIBIT 3 p, As to the listing in legaldheclories.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. Ager reviewing this matter in some detail with Mr. O'Boyle and the Florida managing partner of the law firm I can slate 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 TOWN OF GULF STREAM PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA Delivered via e-mail March 16, 2016 Jonathan O'Boyle [mail to: joboyle@oboylelawfum.com] Re: GS # 2123 (communication -bar) So now I will ask for any and all communications to or from the Town and Sweetapple's firm its employees agents shareholders officers associates or his person regarding that 11126114 entry about a report regarding the Bar. So at the very very minimum there should be records reflecting the order from the Town to Sweetapple to make such a Bar Report, communications about when and where Sweetapple was to deliver that report orally and who was involved, and communications from the Town to Bob and visa versa about the original request (i.e. whether records exist). I beg, please do not make me send in 500 requests with language tweaked in every which way to cover every possible scenario. I beg for a human response that makes sense and that avoids a lawsuit where documents are found to be records and those records responsive and the excuse is mistake. Dear Jonathan O'Boyle [mail to: iobovleAobovlelawfirm.coml, The Town of Gulf Stream has received your original record request dated March 10, 2016. Your original public records request can be found at the following link: http://www2.gulf- stream.ore/weblink/O/doc/82572/Pagel.asi)x. Please refer to the referenced number above with any future correspondence. The responsive records can be found at the same above link. We consider this closed. Respectfully, Town Clerk, Custodian of the Records