Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 4


P. CARROLL, Plaintiff, v. WATERSOU D BEACH COMMU ITY ASSOCIATIO , I C., Florida Corporation DAVID LILIE THAL, individually and as Director, MARY JOULE, SA DRA MATTESO , RO ALD VOELKER, WATERCOLOR COMMU ITY ASSOCIATIO , I C. JOH DOE and JA E DOE Defendants. ____________________________________________/ PLAI TIFFS MEMORA DUM I OPPOSITIO TO DEFE DA TS MOTIO S TO ASSESS ATTOR EYS FEES A D COSTS COMES NOW, Plaintiff John Carroll (Carroll) who files this memorandum in opposition and rebuttal to the Defendants Motions to assess attorneys fees and costs. 1. The Defendants want Carroll to pay for their preparation for trial. This Case o.: 09CA002021

case is going to trial, the Defendants needed to prepare at some point, theres no case law that supports the Defendants position that Carroll should pay for the Defendants trial preparations. 2. The Defendants want Carroll to pay for their preparation and appearance

at the hearing on their own Motion. This Motion is illogical and fundamentally unfair to Carroll. The Defendants attorneys should bear the costs of this Motion pro bono for their clients. Its not fair that their clients should bear the costs of an unsupported Motion.


Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, Appellate Procedure and Judicial

Administration have guided Carroll through every phase of this case. Carroll filed an Appeal of issues related to Defendants who were completed removed from the litigation. These Defendants were not, and did not appear at trial. Carroll filed an Appeal of issues which were approaching the time limits under Florida Appellate Rules. It was the Defendants and the Court whom decided that a mistrial was in Order. 4. Carroll prepared for trial and appeared at trial despite the attorneys

advance knowledge that they had instructed all of the witnesses to not appear. On August 29, 2012 Carroll advanced the trial and spent $632.00 in order to re-subpoena each and every witness. 5. On August 30, 2012 Carroll took witness after witness, and skipped lunch

in order to file the appeal of the issues pertaining to the released defendants. Carroll immediately informed the Court and the Attorneys for the Defendants. 6. The Court called the parties to chambers and Carroll became a spectator

watching the Court and the Defendants Attorneys theorize on whether or not the Court was divested of jurisdiction. The Bar Members, exclusively, decided that they could not decide whether or not the Court lacked jurisdiction to continue the trial. The Court verbally ordered that we not speak of it and continue trial. 7. 8. Carroll continued to advance trial and continued to call witnesses. The following morning the Bar Members, exclusively, decided that the

Court lacked jurisdiction and the Court on its own Motion declared a mistrial. 9. Once again, Carrolls opportunity for justice was moved down the road.


Make no mistake, the Defendants Instant Motions are disingenuous and The Defendants conveniently removed the Trial Judges pre-trial

should be struck.

statement to Mr. Davis MR. DAVIS: ...Judge, I hate to be the bad guy and raise this issue again but Im concerned about, as the Courts aware, the summary judgment granted THE COURT: I dont think summary judgment involves your client, though, does it? MR. DAVIS: No, sir, but heres well, yes, sir, and no, sir. Heres the problem, the way I see it, and I may be dead wrong about this but I dont think so. 11. During Mr. Davis continued speech he then interrogates Carroll

MR. DAVIS: - - Mr. Carroll, I dont know what your plans are, but I would love to know if were going to be faced with that possibility. MR. CARROLL: My plans are to go to trial Monday, try this case and get this behind us. MR. DAVIS: But are you going to leave Watercolor out completely or are you going to appeal that judgment? THE COURT: Mr. Davis, to save us all some time, were going to trial Monday. You know, as Mr. Carroll said, there are all sorts of different possibilities to consider and we dont know what the future holds in that regard. My rulings have been made and they put the case in the status that now exists and thats what well go to trial on. MR. DAVIS: Its my control freak nature, Judge. I get concerned about what I cant control.

Wherefore, Carroll asks the Court to deny the Defendants Motions and Order the Defendants Counsel to not bill their clients for preparation and appearance charges related to this Motion.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished to Christopher L. George, Esq., PO Box 1034, Mobile, AL 36633 and to Mark D. Davis, Esq., 694 Baldwin Ave. Suite 1, PO Box 705, DeFuniak Springs, FL 32435 by electronic mail and hand delivery this 5th day of January, 2012.

_____________________________ John P. Carroll Box 613524 WaterSound, FL 32461