Legal Representation

My opponent's surrogates are out and about attacking me for being a lawyer who has and is representing clients against the City. I have filed a total of six cases against the City during my 28.5 year career here in Mount Dora. I am a Civil Trial Lawyer. When my clients have issues with the City, I represent them. It is what I do for a living and provides me unique perspectives and experiences regarding the operation and decisions of the City.

Case No. 2017 CA 1815. The most publicized of those cases was the Starry Night House litigation where my clients appealed the decision of the City Magistrate (who is hired and paid for by the City) citing them for code violations including graffitti and signage. The action by the City was improper and illegal and the homeowners ultimately prevailed to the embarrassment of the City.

Case No. 2024 CA 1397. This current case is attempting to enforce the Comprehensive Plan's 100 foot height limit against the AMCO development which the City has already argued is the correct interpretation of the Comprehensive Plan. The City should be siding with my clients' but has chosen to take the developer's side. This case will likely have to be handed off after the election.

Case No. 2014 CA 2235. This case involved representing 14 city residents to challenge the proper disposition of an election that ended up as a tie between Nick Girone, and Marie Rich. Our charter at the time required that unless a candidate received a majority of the vote a run off was required. The City sought to settle the tie by drawing names out of a hat contrary to the charter. Ultimately the court ruled, I believe incorrectly, based on a state statute that a coin flip was required. The City Charter should have prevailed.

Case No. 2018 CA 40. This case involved a resident that did not receive proper notice of a code enforement action resulting in an extensive fine. That case was ultimately settled to the benefit of the resident.

Case No. 2014 CA 2235. This case involved a resident on Baker Street where the City planned to build parallel parking where the side walk easement was located such that passengers would necessarily have to trespass to get out of their cars. This project was abandoned due to the claim raised in the action.

Case No. 2013 CA 1827. This case involved a wrongful death action against a drunk driver and the City which had received reports of the drunk driver 10 minutes before the fateful accident and failed to respond. The City ultimately avoided liability due to sovereign immunity and the Public Duty Doctrine.

As you can see, none of these cases involved frivilous or capricious litigation. Most of the cases involved apparent overeach by the City. These cases involved property rights, negligence, legal interpretation, eminent domain, code enforcement, and comprehensive plans, and all of that experience will assist me in representing all of the residents of the City for the next four years.