Law
|
| 3/18/88 | Draft note & trust | ||
| 4/6 | PC | ||
| 4/11 | PC | ||
| 4/14 | PC atty negotiation & redraft LDPC St. Louis | ||
| 4/15 | Redrafting | ||
| 4/16 | Redrafting, PC, Exp mail | ||
| 4/18 | PC | ||
| 4/19 | Redrafting | ||
| 4/21 | Settlement | ||
1988.04.21 (From bill handed to Jean O'Connell by Edward White at settlement)
| 3/18/88 | Draft note & trust | ||
| 4/6 | PC | ||
| 4/11 | PC | ||
| 4/14 | PC atty negotiation & redraft LDPC St. Louis | ||
| 4/15 | Redrafting | ||
| 4/16 | Redrafting, PC, Exp mail | ||
| 4/18 | PC | ||
| 4/19 | Redrafting | ||
| 4/20 | OV A. O'CONNELL | ||
| 4/20 5A | PC's redrafts | ||
| 4/21 | Settlement | ||
hange. Based on Edward White's bills for services he made changes to the settlement documents on April 20, 1992. I was not able to see any of the settlement documents until settlement the next day. I was only given a bill for services when I visited his office on April 20, 1988.*
*I never saw the settlement documents Edward White apparently mailed to me on April 16, 1988. I left home for Virginia on April 19, 1988, to visit Edward White, before they arrived. When I returned home I found a notice that a delivery had been attempted. I called the telephone number the delivery service left and they told me that the delivery man had broken or sprained his angle running away from my dog and would I like to come in and pick this mail up. I asked him who the mail was from and he said Edward White and I said it must be about the sale I had just came back from and he asked me if I still wanted it and I said no. That was a mistake knowing what I know now.
Mr. White
1991.03.15 (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell) (Copy to Jean O'Connell)
"Subsequent to our telephone conversation this morning, I reviewed my files in the cases involving Mrs. O'Connell.
I find that I did indeed mail you a copy of the Limited Power of Attorney along with my letter to you of September 12, 1988. I am enclosing another copy of the Limited Power of Attorney and a copy of the letter I sent you. You may not have received it; however, it was not returned to me by the Post Office.
In regard to your inquiry as to why, in 1988, there came a time when I refused to deal with you on the sale, 7 as I said, I recalled that a conceivably adverse relationship had developed between you and your mother concerning the sale. 8 I call your attention to the sixth paragraph in your letter to her of December 8, 1987, a copy of which is enclosed. 9 As to your complaint that I did not share the sale documents with you, I call your attention to my letter to you of April 16, 1988 in which the deed, note and trust were sent to you. A copy of that letter is enclosed.10
On April 19, 1988 you appeared in my office and stated that you refused to settle on the next day. We did not have a happy discourse. We did discuss the sale and I asked you if you had any other questions. 11
I am somewhat puzzled as to why all this is re-surfacing and after reviewing my file and my notes, am not at all comfortable with continuing the dialogue.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"
7 Shutout. Even if this were true it does not change the law of contracts
(Contract, in part)
"PURCHASE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 24th day of December1987, by and between JEAN MINER, ANTHONY M. O'Connell, TRUSTEE and HERBERT A. HIGHAM, TRUSTEE ("Seller") and LYNCH PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Virginia limited partnership, or assigns ("Purchaser"). The Seller and the Purchaser are sometimes hereinafter referred to as the "parties".
8 Shutout justification. I don't understand how my letter of December 8, 1987, written one day after I was told that trust property was going to be sold and that I, the trustee, was not to come, and approximate 16 days before I found the buyer and negotiated the contract of December 24, 1987, could be a justification for "I recalled that a conceivably adverse relationship had developed between you and your mother concerning the sale"
1991.03.15 (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell) (Copy to Jean O'Connell)
"Subsequent to our telephone conversation this morning, I reviewed my files in the cases involving Mrs. O'Connell.
I find that I did indeed mail you a copy of the Limited Power of Attorney along with my letter to you of September 12, 1988. I am enclosing another copy of the Limited Power of Attorney and a copy of the letter I sent you. You may not have received it; however, it was not returned to me by the Post Office.
In regard to your inquiry as to why, in 1988, there came a time when I refused to deal with you on the sale, as I said, I recalled that a conceivably adverse relationship had developed between you and your mother concerning the sale. I call your attention to the sixth paragraph in your letter to her of December 8, 1987, a copy of which is enclosed. As to your complaint that I did not share the sale documents with you, I call your attention to my letter to you of April 16, 1988 in which the deed, note and trust were sent to you. A copy of that letter is enclosed.
On April 19, 1988 you appeared in my office and stated that you refused to settle on the next day. We did not have a happy discourse. We did discuss the sale and I asked you if you had any other questions.
I am somewhat puzzled as to why all this is re-surfacing and after reviewing my file and my notes, am not at all comfortable with continuing the dialogue.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"9 Enclosure
From Edward White's letter of March 15, 1991, the enclosure of Anthony O'Connell's December 8, 1987, letter
to Jean O'Connell. copies to Edward White, H. A. Higham, Sheila O'Connell and Jean Nader:
"Thank you for your phone call yesterday telling me about your plans to move. I know it is a heart wrenching experience f o r you t o leave the home you have put so much of yourself into over the past fifty years. I congratulate you again or your decision.
On thinking further of our discussion about controlling the destiny of the house, I feel strongly that deed restrictions or soliciting public support t o move the house will only result in obstructing a successful sale.
No one, especially the county, is going to spend $300,000 t o $400,000(?) to have it moved so you can make a better profit. If the county did any thing, they would preserve it in situ, perhaps acquiring the land by eminent domain, a logical extension of the Forestdale School playground. I feel when the county did take seven of your ten acres by eminent domain for Forestdale School, they would have taken the entire property if they knew you were not going to live in the house. They did not do you any favors then by compensating you at $7,000/acre and they are not going to do you any favors now.
At the very least, publicly bringing up the historical significance of the house when you are trying to sell it will make a prospective buyer think very hard about the rezoning battle.
I feel any negotiations concerning the house itself should best be done in private between you and the interested buyer. You also have final control by not selling t o a buyer whose plans you find unsuitable. If you cared enought, a successful sale may give you enought money to have the house moved at your expense.
I am disappointed that you apparently do not want me involved in this transaction. As near as I can determine, you are concerned that I will block the sale. Please tell me of you specific concerns and maybe we will all have a more pleasant and. successful experience. [Sixth paragraph] **
If I had any alternative I would not say this - To get a successful sale and to minimize what I know is an incredibly painful experience for you-Walk away from the house and don't look back. Remember it as it was. It is the new owners responsibility and it is lifted from your shoulders.
With respect to your urgency in selling, I am driving to Virginia tomorrow. I can be reached at the home of
Rosemary Haly
220 Wildman 3NE
Leesburg, Virginia 22075
(703) 777-6371
Sincerely, Anthony O'Connell "** Jean O'Connell would not have told the trustee Anthony O'Connell not to come to the sale of trust property unless she was instructed to do so. There is no known limit to the degree of wrong in giving instructions.
By this action would the accountants gain control of assets and the family lose control of assets; would the family be blamed rather than the accountants who instructed the family; would secrecy be established; would this divide the family; is this a consistant pattern?10 Enclosure: "Share". I don't understand how instructing the trustee to sign a deed selling trust property that the trustee is responsible for, not to mention the content of the deed, is "sharing".
From Edward White's letter of March 15, 1991, the enclosure of Edward White's April 16, 1988, letter to Anthony O'Connell:
"Re: O'Connell to Lynch Properties
Dear Mr. O'Connell,
Enclosed for your signature before a notary public is the original deed. Please date it on the first line and return it to me immediately by express mail.* Also enclosed for your review are copies of the note deed of trust.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"*I don't understand why Mr. White was silent for approximately three and a half months and then instructs the trustee to sign a deed and return it immediately by express mail.
11 Visit- sign or tell family. Good, do this, this is the crux of the matter.
Bar
(1993.02.10 Bar [James McCauley] to Anthony O'Connell)
"Dear Mr. O'Connell:
This letter is in reference to your complaint against the above-referenced attorney received in our office on December 7, 1992. In addition, I acknowledge receipt of your supplemental correspondence dated January 26, 1993, received in my office on January 29. I have concluded my preliminary investigation of your original complaint and wish to advise you that your complaint presents no basis for further investigation by this office for the reasons I shall set out below.
The Respondent did not file a written answer to your complaint. 12 However, Mr. White is represented by counsel in this matter, David R. Rosenfeld, Esquire, and I met with Mr. Rosenfeld and his associate in Alexandria to go over all of the factual matters related to this complaint.
My investigation reveals that the Respondent did not serve as settlement attorney for this transaction,13 In fact, the closing was handled by Coldwell Banker, and the legal instruments for the transaction were prepared under the supervision of McGuire, Woods, Battle & Boothe. I have seen the real estate closing file which was delivered to Mr. Wright by the McGuire, Woods firm, and I am firmly convinced that Mr. White took no part in that transaction other than to perhaps provide informal legal advice to your mother. Your letter of December 28, 1987 is insufficient as a matter to law to establish an attorneyclient
relationship unless there is some evidence that Mr. White did in fact undertake to handle the closing, Finally, there is no ethical issue raised simply because Mr. White is named as a co-trustee in the Deed of Trust securing the purchase by the Lynch Properties Limited Partnership.
12 Shutout. I don't understand how Mr. White's shutting out the point of contact for the Seller for approximately three and a half months, and that point of contact for the Seller driving from Sait Louis, Missouri, to Mr. White's office to try to find out what was going on, is made to appear this way.
My not falling for the hire another attorney pattern to try to find out what Edward White was doing while he was withholding what he was doing, disallows the two attorney cover (insert bar's statement?) and shuting me out under the guise of protecting my family from me is more obvious. NEEDS WORK
13 Visit- sign or tell family
1???????? Position. I don't understand why Mr. White does not have to take an accountable position
(1993.02.10 Bar [James McCauley] to Anthony O'Connell, in part)
"The Respondent did not file a written answer to your complaint."13 What is it that makes Mr. White not have to be accountable? (Did the bar buy the Were-taking-ovr-the-family's aseets to protect the family from an adverse family (someone who tries to make the opaque transparrent)
(1993.11.01 Bar [James M. McCauley] to Anthony O'Connell)
"Dear Mr. O'Connell:
This letter is in response to your certified letter dated September 20, 1993, which was received in this office on September 23, 1993. As you know, the basis for my dismissal of your complaint was the absence of an attorney-client relationship,between you and the Respondent. Nothing you have submitted to me under cover letter dated September 20, 1993 changes my conclusion.
The copy of Mr. White's fee statement shows an entry: "4120 OV A. O'CONNELL." The fact that you had an office visit with Mr. White does not create an attorney-client relationship.
I note that the fee statement dated April 16, 1988 is sent to Mrs. Jean M. O'Connell and I believe that your mother is the client in this particular matter, not you.
Your original complaint alleges that the Respondent handled your mother's estate incompetently. I do not believe you have standing to complain, because you are not a. client of Mr. White. The second enclosure, a list of your unreturned telephone calls to Mr. White, also does not change my conclusion. Unless you can show that you are a client of Mr. White, Mr. White was under no ethical duty or mandate to return your telephone calls. This complaint also boils down to.your word 14 against Mr. White's as to whether he was representing you at the settlement on the real estate transaction. The Bar would have to prove your position by clear and convincing evidence, and I simply do not see any clear and convincing evidence that Mr. White had agreed to represent you, or that he represented you by his conduct.
Finally, you indicate that Mr. White, over a period of seven years, has made defamatory and divisive statements which you consider to be far more damaging than the issue regarding the real estate settlement. The Code of Professional Responsibility does not proscribe defamatory statements by an attorney, and our office is not the appropriate forum to investigate or prosecute your claim. If you feel that you have been defamed or libeled by the Respondent, then your remedy is to file a civil action,15 but a Bar complaint is not an appropriate vehicle to resolve that issue.
I am truly sorry that I cannot advance your claims .or interest, however, I must stand on my original decision to dismiss your complaint. I trust that you will appreciate my explanation, although you disagree with it.
Very truly yours
14 Words. I don't understand why this would boil down to my word against Edward White's. Why not look at the evidence and the law of contracts? Why not have Edward White take some accountable positions such as:
(1) Who did he present and when?,
(2) What is the name of the person who wrote the 1988 deed?, or
(3) Please explain the discrepancies between your letter of March 15, 1991, to Jean O'Connell, and what you apparently told the bar.
15 Civil action. The structure of a civil action would set innocent family member against innocent family member.
I do not understand why the connection between the lawyer's defamatory and divisive statements and shuting me out of their activities and accounting is recognized. Please see 4debts2payments
But Edward White split the "Seller" with two types of Deeds and two different bills and the deed says:
"THIS DEED, made this 21st day of April, 1988, by and between JEAN MINER O'CONNELL, unmarried; and ANTHONY M. O'CONNELL and HERBERT A. HIGHAM, Trustees of the Trust established by the Will of the late Harold A. O'Connell, hereinafter called Grantors;"
But the point of contact for the Seller was shut out. But I never heard from Edward White after my letter to him of December 28, 1987, until I drove to Virginia and saw him on April 20, 1988, the day before settlement. It's difficult to document a non-event. If you hire an attorney to see what Edward White is doing you have a two attorney in the family situation. See 2attys-1985 and 2attys-1992 to see how this is used.
Two attorney trap
Comment: Would Edward White's withholding knowledge of what he is doing prompt most people to hire an attorney to find out what Edward White was doing? If you do that it becomes a two attorney situation and a divide in the family and Seller. I didn't do it because I have taken a lot of courses in contract law and I did not believe that anyone would dare do anything contrary to the contract. The withholding of what is needed is a cause and effect pattern that usually results in two attorneys and that is used to justify division and division is used as cover.
Shutting out the point of contact for the Seller is against the law of contracts. GREAT
Related topic: 4 debts 2 payments
Where does it say in the Court records that nthony O'Connell I could not qualify as Trustee? GREAT. What was the result of lawyer-fix? What prevented the trustees from qualifying on May 1, 1986? What might be the justication for the April 21, 1988, deed that says Anthony O'Connell could not qualify as trustee?
Questions
- Is an invisible wall of secrecy created? Does secrecy prevail.
- Is conflict and confusion created from behind that invisible wall?
- Is the conflict and confusion made to appear as if it came from the family?
- Do the accountants gain control of assets? - Does Edward White become Trustee for a $1,161,287 Deed of Trust?
- Does the conflict and confusion cover the accounting trails?
- Is the family powerless to uncover the trails? What are the accounting trails from Note 1?
- Do the accountants remain unaccountable? (What is the name ofthe person who wrote the 1988 deed?)
- Is it impossible to find out where the maoney went?
- Do the accountants make it appear that the family [Anthony O'Connell] is the problem?
Phrases
Regulatory free zone
It is necessary to differential between cover and what is not cover BEST
Compare the sales contract with the deed and apply the law fo contracts
"Leverage" of using the family. They have control of your family; of the members of your family your family's assets.
Short of a miracle of transparency and insight