Page 1 of 1
Waiving Attorney Client Privilege
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 7:27 am
by Bill Call
They are still Hospital records that have not been released because of "attorney client privilege".
Can any lawyers out there explain how politicians can claim that privilege?
The Mayor and Council are negotiating the transfer of City assets to the Cleveland Clinic and private foundations. The Mayor and Council are paid by the people of Lakewood. The lawyers are paid by the people of Lakewood. The assets were owned by the people of Lakewood.
Who is the client?
Can the new Mayor waive that privilege?
Lakewood has a chance to heal the wounds. Starting with truth would help.
Councilman O'Leary, will you support waiving attorney client privilege? If not, why not?
Re: Waiving Attorney Client Privilege
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 8:08 am
by Jim O'Bryan
Bill Call wrote:They are still Hospital records that have not been released because of "attorney client privilege".
Can any lawyers out there explain how politicians can claim that privilege?
The Mayor and Council are negotiating the transfer of City assets to the Cleveland Clinic and private foundations. The Mayor and Council are paid by the people of Lakewood. The lawyers are paid by the people of Lakewood. The assets were owned by the people of Lakewood.
Who is the client?
Can the new Mayor waive that privilege?
Lakewood has a chance to heal the wounds. Starting with truth would help.
Councilman O'Leary, will you support waiving attorney client privilege? If not, why not?
Council President O'Leary could have ended this bullshit and cover-up at any time. City Council has the right to have an outside firm come in and look at the documents. Any one of the people claiming attorney client privilege could have made public their part. Think of the light council people like Sam O'Leary, John Litten, and Tom Bullock could have shed on the cover-up. But why would they? Look at their connections, look at their benefactors. Co-Conspirators more than Council.
Lies, cover-ups, misleading, outright lying to residents and courts, these people could have saved Lakewood hundreds of thousands of dollars, and possibly gotten more than $1 for our largest public asset, worth more than $248 million in one report.
The new Mayor, the right mayor can do the right thing.
We cannot get our hospital back, however we can get City Hall back over the next couple elections.
.
Re: Waiving Attorney Client Privilege
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 8:51 am
by Bill Call
Jim O'Bryan wrote:
We cannot get a hospital back, however we can get City Hall back over the next couple elections.
.
Campaign Slogan?
We can't take back our Hospital. We can take back City Hall
Re: Waiving Attorney Client Privilege
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:51 am
by Jim O'Bryan
Bill Call wrote:Jim O'Bryan wrote:
We cannot get a hospital back, however we can get City Hall back over the next couple elections.
.
Campaign Slogan?
We can't take back our Hospital. We can take back City Hall
Bill
The hospital debacle
The lies
The cover-ups
The needless lawsuits fighting residents
the bad management
the improper hirings
Nepotism
Repeated Ethic failures and gindings
the senseless cuts
the drunken sailor spending
Losing our largest asset to a secret cabal, was just the visible symptom of a City Hall out of control.
.
Re: Waiving Attorney Client Privilege
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:55 am
by Mark Kindt
Bill Call wrote:They are still Hospital records that have not been released because of "attorney client privilege".
Can any lawyers out there explain how politicians can claim that privilege?
The Mayor and Council are negotiating the transfer of City assets to the Cleveland Clinic and private foundations. The Mayor and Council are paid by the people of Lakewood. The lawyers are paid by the people of Lakewood. The assets were owned by the people of Lakewood.
Who is the client?
Can the new Mayor waive that privilege?
Lakewood has a chance to heal the wounds. Starting with truth would help.
Councilman O'Leary, will you support waiving attorney client privilege? If not, why not?
Mr. Call, the City of Lakewood as a legal corporation is itself the client in this situation and under
proper circumstances has a normal legal right to assert the attorney-client privileges with respect to its relationship with its lawyers. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has also vindicated that right in the Essi case.
HOWEVER, Lakewood City Council as well as its citizens have a very good right to see all of the redacted or withheld documents.
They should ALL be released. Now.
Why?
1. The City of Lakewood knows that it intentionally violated the law in denying the release of the public documents. Justice and fairness demand their release. It cannot pretend that it didn't know. It knew!
2. Since all the litigation is now over, there is no risk of harm to the City of Lakewood and considerable benefit to the citizens to have complete openness and transparency on the documents still held secret.
3. The Mayor or the Law Director can release unredacted or withheld documents. They should do so immediately. City Council should insist upon this.
4. It should be a campaign issue for all candidates.
Re: Waiving Attorney Client Privilege
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 10:31 am
by Mark Kindt
Mark Kindt wrote:Bill Call wrote:They are still Hospital records that have not been released because of "attorney client privilege".
Can any lawyers out there explain how politicians can claim that privilege?
The Mayor and Council are negotiating the transfer of City assets to the Cleveland Clinic and private foundations. The Mayor and Council are paid by the people of Lakewood. The lawyers are paid by the people of Lakewood. The assets were owned by the people of Lakewood.
Who is the client?
Can the new Mayor waive that privilege?
Lakewood has a chance to heal the wounds. Starting with truth would help.
Councilman O'Leary, will you support waiving attorney client privilege? If not, why not?
Mr. Call, the City of Lakewood as a legal corporation is itself the client in this situation and under
proper circumstances has a normal legal right to assert the attorney-client privileges with respect to its relationship with its lawyers. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has also vindicated that right in the Essi case.
HOWEVER, Lakewood City Council as well as its citizens have a very good right to see all of the redacted or withheld documents.
They should ALL be released. Now.
Why?
1. The City of Lakewood knows that it intentionally violated the law in denying the release of the public documents. Justice and fairness demand their release. It cannot pretend that it didn't know. It knew!
2. Since all the litigation is now over, there is no risk of harm to the City of Lakewood and considerable benefit to the citizens to have complete openness and transparency on the documents still held secret.
3.
The Mayor or the Law Director can release unredacted or withheld documents. They should do so immediately. City Council should insist upon this.
For Clarity: The Mayor or the Law Director can immediately release redacted or withheld documents. Same with a future mayor or a future law director.
4. It should be a campaign issue for all candidates.
Re: Waiving Attorney Client Privilege
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 12:01 pm
by Dan Alaimo
Lately I've been thinking about councilperson Anderson. He always struck me as a very good man stuck in a very bad situation. Will he come clean before he leaves office?
Re: Waiving Attorney Client Privilege
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 6:17 pm
by Richard Baker
I only note one mention of attorney client privilege in the state sunshine statue and it does refer to a city claiming attorney client privilege for documents after negotiations have ended. Who in the City of Lakewood has taken the required training? If no one in the city has attended, the city is in violation.
"To ensure that all employees of public offices are appropriately educated about a public office's obligations under division (B) of this section, all elected officials or their appropriate designees shall attend training approved by the attorney general as provided in section 109.43 of the Revised Code. A future official may satisfy the requirements of this division by attending the training before taking office, provided that the future official may not send a designee in the future official's place."
Re: Waiving Attorney Client Privilege
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:22 pm
by Kate McCarthy
Dan Alaimo wrote:Lately I've been thinking about councilperson Anderson. He always struck me as a very good man stuck in a very bad situation. Will he come clean before he leaves office?
I don't agree that he was a good man stuck in a very bad situation. He chose his path. And since he was listed as a host for one of O'Leary's fund raisers, he has further cemented where he stands. By coming clean he would have to acknowledge his complicity. I don't imagine that will ever happen.
Re: Waiving Attorney Client Privilege
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 10:50 pm
by m buckley
Kate McCarthy wrote:Dan Alaimo wrote:Lately I've been thinking about councilperson Anderson. He always struck me as a very good man stuck in a very bad situation. Will he come clean before he leaves office?
I don't agree that he was a good man stuck in a very bad situation. He chose his path. And since he was listed as a host for one of O'Leary's fund raisers, he has further cemented where he stands. By coming clean he would have to acknowledge his complicity. I don't imagine that will ever happen.
Ms. McCarthy,
I waited all night to read that.
Mr. Alaimo,
I'm curious, what was that very bad situation, which using your words, " a very good man", David Anderson got stuck in ?
Was it that moment when he chose 'all in' on the lies, the backroom/broom closet politics, the scorched earth politics of Mike Summers, over truth and transparency?
Yeah, he got stuck. He got stuck in that moment when character and courage mattered.
Re: Waiving Attorney Client Privilege
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 11:44 pm
by Dan Alaimo
The couple of times I've met him, he struck me as a decent guy at heart. I've been wrong before and may very well be wrong on this. Wishful thinking, but I very much want someone from that crew to turn.
Re: Waiving Attorney Client Privilege
Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 7:16 am
by Bridget Conant
Dan Alaimo wrote:The couple of times I've met him, he struck me as a decent guy at heart. I've been wrong before and may very well be wrong on this. Wishful thinking, but I very much want someone from that crew to turn.
Never going to happen.
Even if they still have political aspirations, like Cindy Marx, that preclude dropping a dime, to admit that you gave assent to this deal when you barely read the documents or understood the details is too personally embarrassing, is it not?
Re: Waiving Attorney Client Privilege
Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 7:23 am
by Jim O'Bryan
Bridget Conant wrote:Dan Alaimo wrote:The couple of times I've met him, he struck me as a decent guy at heart. I've been wrong before and may very well be wrong on this. Wishful thinking, but I very much want someone from that crew to turn.
Never going to happen.
Even if they still have political aspirations, like Cindy Marx, that preclude dropping a dime, to admit that you gave assent to this deal when you barely read the documents or understood the details is too personally embarrassing, is it not?
Let's be honest, the ring of dishonesty is far much large than that. WE have the Law Director, Finance Director, other people at the executive level on in on the charade. Or so out of it, and scared for their jobs, none dare mention it to any one but friends. But there is the problem, in the most inbred city in America, friends talk, and the secret plans bubble to life in backrooms. Let's not forget the lobbying group BuildLakewood and their members that filed false police reports, and SLAPP lawsuit to silence legal honest talk about their secret plans. :ooling back it is such a painful thing to look at. A small conspiracy to grab the $$$$$ and the land before they died of old age. One last shot at developing something, anything, no matter what it cost the hard working people of Lakewood in the long run.
We can never get our Hospital back, but the return of honest government starts in November.
.
Re: Waiving Attorney Client Privilege
Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 8:55 pm
by Dan Alaimo
Does anyone in the administration and Build Lakewood have a conscience? Where is our John Dean?
Re: Waiving Attorney Client Privilege
Posted: Sun Jun 23, 2019 12:27 pm
by ryan costa
Plaintiffs and Defendants are not allowed to lie in court.
they have to hire lawyers to do that for them.
It is legal.