Butler Steps Down, City Asks For More Time

[Jim O'Bryan]

Last week all news sources seemed to miss a big moment.

Kevin Butler and Jennifer Swallow Step Down
From the court document = http://media.lakewoodobserver.com/media ... 677900.pdf
NOW COME Kevin M. Butler and Jennifer L. Swallow, two of the attorneys for the respondent, the City of Lakewood, Ohio, who pursuant to Loc.App.R. 44 hereby give the court and all parties notice that they have withdrawn as counsel for the respondent, as one or both of them may be called as witnesses in the matter. The respondent will continue to be represented by its remaining counsel of record, John T. McLandrich and Alix M. Noureddine, whose contact information appears in the attached certificate of service.

And the new firm, up against yet another Court Ordered Deadline (June 12, 2017) To Turn Over Public Documents To The People Of Lakewood, City Hall with new legal team, kick the ball down the road again. Asking for 60 days past when the courts make a summary judgment in a case they already did, and ruled "all the documents were public, and if there was a problem, the courts could appoint someone to go through them first."

Motion for More Time
From the court document = http://media.lakewoodobserver.com/media ... 678083.pdf
Now comes Respondent, City of Lakewood, by and through counsel, Mazanec, Raskin, & Ryder Co., LPA, and hereby respectfully request that this Court grant Respondent leave to refile its Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and extend the deadline of its Motion for Summary Judgment until a date 60 days after this Court has ruled on its Partial Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings.
Respondent is continuing to review potentially responsive documents it can identify and to index the same, as required by this Court's current Order.

One has to ask, just how bad are the documents they are hiding?

.

[Bridget Conant]

I wondered from the start how Butkiss, I mean Butler, could be his own lawyer. He is a defendant in the lawsuit but represents himself?

[Jim O'Bryan]

I wondered from the start how Butkiss, I mean Butler, could be his own lawyer. He is a defendant in the lawsuit but represents himself?

“He who represents himself has a fool for a client” - Abraham Lincoln

Hiding public records from the public is wrong. The entire city is asking WTF?

.

[Pam Wetula]

Respondent is continuing to review potentially responsive documents it can identify and to index the same, as required by this Court's current Order.

Make that:

The Respondent (City of Lakewood) is continuing to: (chose 1) Mislay, Misplace, Lose, Delete, Destroy, Alter, Dispose of, Hide. Redact
potentially : (chose 1) damaging, undesirable, prejudicial, destructive, eye opening, harmful to the city, ruinous to the city, bad
documents it can identify and to index the same, etc..

[Bridget Conant]

My favorite line in the motion:

Respondents' inadvertence in not notifying Relator of redactions of the records ....was a simple oversight

[Michael Deneen]

This title is deceptive....Butler hasn't "stepped down" from City Hall, which is the position that matters.

[Mark Kindt]

I want to make this point crystal clear.

Until the City retains a third-party electronic discovery consultant/vendor it is simply "pretending" to conduct a search. These documents are not resting in a physical file cabinet. They are digital. They must be searched professionally. This is the standard of practice in the legal profession. The Essi case is almost a year-old and there is no evidence that any competent professional digital search has been conducted. Without a competent search, the City does not have a factual basis to assert either exemptions or attorney-client privilege. And, consequently, it cannot comply with the existing court orders in the case.

I believe that Mr. Essi has been treated in bad faith by counsel for the City. I believe that the City has treated the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in bad faith by its conduct in this case and others (Skindell v. Madigan).

Until the requested public record are searched by a professional third-party e-discovery firm, the City cannot comply with the Ohio public records laws.

This is a tactic of obfuscation and delay. They know exactly what they are doing.

The City needs to respond to all pending records requests under any request without delay.

[mjkuhns]

Until the City retains a third-party electronic discovery consultant/vendor it is simply "pretending" to conduct a search. … Without a competent search, the City does not have a factual basis to assert either exemptions or attorney-client privilege. And, consequently, it cannot comply with the existing court orders in the case.

…I believe that the City has treated the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in bad faith by its conduct in this case and others (Skindell v. Madigan).

When I see very knowledgeable experts like Mr. Kindt make assessments like these, I'm reminded of a reminiscence of the late Fitzroy Maclean.

As a young man, Maclean once ran for and won election to Britain's parliament, as in essence a kind of dodge around certain wartime policies he found unsatisfactory. Upon meeting Winston Churchill some time after, Churchill said "so this is the young man who used the Mother of Parliaments as a public convenience." Maclean's actual intent was benign, or even commendable, so it was with relatively good humor that Churchill made the remark…

The impression I form from Mr. Kindt's lucid and persuasive commentary, is that local courts have of late been used as a public convenience, with intent that is difficult to recognize as benign let alone commendable.

[m buckley]

Hiding public records from the public is wrong. The entire city is asking WTF?
.

Mr. O'Bryan, A slight correction.

Here's who's not asking WTF:
Sam O'Leary.
David ( reams of paper) Anderson.
John Litten.
Dan O'Malley.
Tom Bullock.
Cindy Marx.
Ryan Nowlin.

The Council of Heroes.

2017. Bullock. Marx. Nowlin.
Hold them accountable. Kick them to the curb.

[Dan Alaimo]

I'd cut Dan O'Malley some slack here. I spoke to him the other day and he is asking some important questions.

[Lori Allen _]

I do not believe Mr. O'Malley deserves any slack. He is a member of council and sat through the executive sessions.

He knew exactly what was going on, and yet, chose to remain silent.

Both Mr. Butler and Mr. O'Malley, at anytime, could have gone to the authorities about the alleged illegal acts going on behind the scenes. Both remained silent.

I believe both men knew what they were doing. They made their choices and now will have to deal with the consequences.