June 15th 2011 Park Lawsuit Update. IP: 72.91.76.175 Posted on June 16, 2011 at 01:19:02 AM by Sonny Lefstead
Today, I obtained an email (see below) that was sent to retiree John Parker from Attorney Wayne Thomas. It is an update on the Parker lawsuit.
Sonny Lefstead Ret TFR/PCFR
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
John,
This is to update you on the status of your case.
This case has been "under submission" to the Court since last November. That is, all of the evidence and briefs have been submitted or filed since that time. As you know, the issues before the Court for consideration are the approval of the stipulated class action settlement agreement and judgment and our application for attorney's fees and costs.
The Court has not yet ruled on either issue. The first issue was "stipulated" or agreed to by the parties. The Court does have final say-so on approval of the agreement and judgment, however. At the hearings, I requested that the Court rule on the settlement agreement and judgment immediately, since there was no disagreement between the parties as to the substance of those matters. You will recall that the Board opposed immediate entry of approval of the settlement agreement and judgment and took the position that ruling on those matters should wait until ruling on the motion for attorneys fees and costs.
I believe the Board's concern was the possibility of piecemeal appeals of the stipulated judgment and the fees and costs judgment. We had no problem with allowing any appeal of the stipulated judgment position go forward immediately while we awaited decision on the fees and costs. At least we would have the settlement agreement and judgment resolved and on its way through the system in the event there was an appeal.
However, since the Court has not approved the stipulated final judgment, I presume it is waiting to do so when it rules on the fees and costs motion, as proposed by the Board.
I have gotten a number of calls from you and other members of the class regarding the amount of time that has passed since this case was submitted to the Court. This is not that unusual of a circumstance. As I am sure you are aware from the news media, the courts have been under severe caseload and funding constraints for the past few years. This has slowed down disposition of many cases.
At the same time, I know that the retirees are entitled to the balance of their award in this case. All can certainly use the money and I am sure it is critical for some. This fact prompted me to request the Board to join with us to ask the Court to move us to the head of the line of the cases to be decided. I made this request informally to Board counsel in April. After not hearing back from him for a couple of weeks, I wrote the letter that is an attachment to this email. On May 31, I received a one sentence response from Board counsel: "We will not join in a joint request."
This response followed a Board meeting at which no mention of my request or letter was made in the public session. I can only take from this that the Board is perfectly fine with the status quo.
The next question I am frequently asked is whether the retirees will be paid immediately when the trial court finally decides the case. The answer to that is: "not necessarily." I expect separate orders to be entered on the judgment approving the settlement agreement and on the fees and costs issue. Either judgment can be appealed and the appeal of either judgment will delay the finality of the settlement. The Board strongly opposed payment of any fees to class counsel in this case, especially since we obtained a partial summary judgment holding that the fees and costs would come from the Board and not from the common fund being awarded to the retirees. As we have discussed, the Board has insurance to cover this liability. Nevertheless, I anticipate that the Board will appeal any substantial fee award in this case. That will add at least another year after the trial court's decision before it becomes final and the retirees can be paid the balance of their award pursuant to the settlement agreement.
In summary, I do not know how long it will take the Court to get to our case. It could be decided today or tomorrow or in six months, or longer. I simply do not know. I have considered unilaterally requesting the Court to advance our case for the reasons stated above and because of the advanced age of many of the retirees. However, my experience has been that making such a request unilaterally can be problematical and lead to negative consequences. That was why I asked the Board to join with us for the benefit of the retirees. Since we did not get the Board's support in attempting to advance the case, I can only ask that the retirees be patient.
I know that these issues are of interest to all members of the class. Please feel free to share this email with the other class members.
Wayne Lee Thomas
Akerman Senterfitt
Suntrust Financial Centre, Suite 1700
401 East Jackson Street
Tampa, FL 33602-5250
813 209 5060 direct
813 223 2837 fax
Replies: There have been no replies.
You must register before you can post on this board. You can register here.