AGENDA REQUEST AGENDA ITEM NO: XIV.4. New Business. June 18, 2018 BY City Attorney Robert Fournier City Attorney Fournier SUBJECT:

Transcription

1 AGENDA HEADING: New Business AGENDA REQUEST COMMISSION MEETING DATE: June 18, 2018 BY City Attorney Robert Fournier City Attorney Fournier AGENDA ITEM NO: XIV.4. Originating Department SUBJECT: Department Head Presenter Discussion Re: Discussion regarding settlement letter from Buck Leiter Palm Avenue Development, LLC dated June 6, 2018 COMMISSION PRIORITIES: Business Requirement EXPLANATION: On June 6, 2018, the City Attorney received the following self-explanatory letter from counsel for Buck Leiter Palm Avenue Development, LLC, which makes a specific offer of settlement regarding the recent jury verdict in the Buck Leiter v. City of Sarasota case. ADMINISTRATION'S RECOMMENDATION: At the discretion of the City Commission. APPROVAL SUMMARY: Approval Department Head Approval City Auditor and Clerk Approval Required Date Completed Y 06/06/2018 Y 06/06/2018 Completed By Robert Fournier Pamela Nadalini Status APPROVED APPROVED

2 ADDITIONAL EXPLANATION: AGENDA REQUEST ADDITIONAL ADMIN RECOMMENDATION: FUNDING SOURCE: AMOUNT: HOUSING IMPACT (Per House): NEW CONSTRUCTION: REHABILITATION: SUPPORT DEPARTMENTS: $ 0 $ 0 City Auditor and Clerk - Pamela Nadalini City Attorney - Robert Fournier COMMISSION ACTION: Final Action Motion: Motion By: AGENDA DISPOSITION Second By: Vote: 2

3 The Leiter Group Attomey~and Counselors June 6, 2018 Via Mr, Morgan Bentley, Esq. Bentley & Bruning PA 783 South Orange Ave., Third Floor Sarasota, FL THOMAS E. LEITER 309 A MAIN STREET PEORlA,lL / (fax) tleiter@leitergroup.i:om roberlfournier@sarasotagov.com Mr. Robert Fournier, Esq. Fournier & Connolly, PA 1 South School Avenue, Ste. 700 Sarasota, FL Re: Sarasota County Case NO.2010CA6180NC Dear Mr. Bentley and Mr. Fournier,. TIlls letter follows my earlier correspondence dated May 30, In that earlier correspondence I indicated that my client is ready, willing and able to resolve the dispute and. invited the Commission's response by June 5, In that I have received no response to that correspondencemy client has authorized me to restate the letter and make a specific settlement proposai to the Commission for its considerationbefore additional expense is inc1.1lted. BACKGROUND On May 21, 2018 a Sarasota County jury of six persons returned a verdict in favor of Buck Leiter Palm Avenue Development, LLC and against the City of Sarasota in the amount of $49,782, This verdict, entered at the end of the jury trial followed lengthy litigation which included an appeal to the Second District Court of Appeal. On March 3, 2017 the Court ofappeal rendered its Opinion in the reported case BuckLeiter Palm Avenue Development, LLC v. City ofsarasota, 212 So. 3'd 1078 (2 nd Dist. DCA 2017). The Court ofappeal ruled that the Initial Redevelopment Agreement entered into between Buck Leiter and 'the City was a binding contract and remanded the case for trial. The case has now culminated in the verdict of the jury 1 of 3

4 in the amount of $49,782, My clients are willing to consider settling all issues at this stage ofthe proceedings and before the accrual ofadditional attorneys' fees, costs and interest. BENEFITS OF SETILEMENT There are substantial benefits to settlement at this point in the proceedings. Settlement eliminates the risks inherent in continued litigation. The risks include uncertainty ofoutcome for both parties. However, in that this case has already been considered by the Court ofappeal, I believe the risks to the City are far greater than those to Buck Leiter. The primary issue considered by the Court ofappeal was whether the contract was binding. The Court ofappeal resolved that in favor ofbuck Leiter and the jury determined that the City breached the binding contract. It should be kept in mind that the breach of contract occurred under an administration comprised of five commissioners who are no longer serving the City. The ptesent commissioners were not holding office at the time ofthe breach. The present commissioners are now in a position to resolve this long standing dispute and my clients are willing to cooperate in arriving at a settlement provided that the settlement occurs promptly and without further litigation. As it presently stands my clients are entitled to payment in the amount of $49,782, plus interest and attorneys' fees. The Court ofappeal has already ordered that attorneys' fees be paid to Buck Leiter. Attorneys' fees will include those fees incurred on appeal and at trial. Interest rates for computing interest are provided by statute and vary from year to year. In 2008 the rate was 11% per annum; in 2009 it was 8%, in 2010 it was 6% and in 2011 varied from 6% to 4.75%. Thereafter the rate has continjied to be 4.75%. While the total interest amount requires a computation for each year, a reasonable annual estimated rate is 5% which could add an additional liability for the City in excess of $24,000, Attorneys' fees while not yet calculated, could add a further substantial sum causing the total liability to the City to exceed $75,000, If litigation continues and the verdict is affirmed, additional interest and attorneys' fees will accrue. In my earlier correspondencei pointed out that Plaintiff is entitled to recover its attorneys' fees and both prejudgment and post judgment interest. I also mentioned that my client would be willing to substantially reduce the potential award and structure the timing ofthe payment. After thorough consideration my client is willing to offer to the City Co=ission the following settlement proposal. This settlement proposal is given in accordance with FRE 408 and Florida Rules ofcivil Procedure for the sole purpose ofsettlement ofthe case and cannot be used as evidence of the amounts actually due to my client which are substantially greater than the proposal This settlement proposal shall not be admissible in any proceeding. My clienthas authol1zed me to co=unicate the following settlementproposal. 1. SETTLEMENT AMOUNT My client will accept the principal sum of the jury verdict in the amount of $49,782, and will waive all prejudgment interest and attorneys' fees. 2 2 of 3

5 2. PAYMENT TERMS Payment shall be made in no more than five (5) installments. The first installment must be made in the amount of $9,782, no later than July 3, The balance of $40,000, shall be paid in four (4) annual installments of $10,000, each the first of which shall be made on July 3, 2019 and subsequent annual installments shall be made on the same date thereafter. Inter.est shall be paid annually at the rate of3% per al)l1um computed on the unpaid balance due from time to time. Interest payments shall be made on the same date that principal payments are required. The City shall have the right ofprepayment at any time without penalty. The settlement terms shall be documented in an order entered by the Court and the Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms ofsettlement. Final language ofthe settlement agreement shall be agreed to by attorneys for both parties. If the City Commission wishes to accept the settlement proposal, acceptance must be made in writing to the undersigued attorney no later than June 19,2018 by 5:00 p.m. EST. Ifyou have any questions regarding this correspondence please do not hesitate to call. THE LEITER GROUP ATTORNEYS & COUNSELORS, P.C. TEUmIs cc: Via of 3