Filing # 147648602 E-Filed 04/13/2022 04:15:38 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC, Publisher of the PALM BEACH POST, Plaintiff, v. CASE.NO.: 19-CA-O14681 DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida; SHARON R. BOCK, as Clerk and Comptroller of Palm Beach County, Florida. Defendants._:_/ AMENDED & SUPPLEMENTAL AFFIDAVIT OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES & COSTS STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF NASSAU BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority appeared Douglas A. Wyler, Esq., who, after being first duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. Affiant is a partner of JACOBS, SCHOLZ & WYLER, LLC, counsel for Defendant, DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida, (“Aronberg”), as well as general counsel to the Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association, (“FPAA”), and makes this Affidavit of his own personal knowledge. 2. Affiant is licensed to practice law in the State of Florida, is an active member of the Florida Bar in good standing and has engaged in the practice of law in the State of Florida since 2015. 3. As detailed herein, the sendees rendered by Affiant and his firm pertain to Affiant’s demand letter and motion for attorneys’ fees sent to Plaintiffs counsel pursuant to § 57.105, Florida Statutes, on June 8, 2020, in defending against Count I of Plaintiff s Amended Complaint, Party JOINT i ID#. J33 EV#T53 I DATE ADMITTED: 9/fe/Zpza Case No. 2019-CA-014681 Joint Exhibit J33 CA/Aronberg-001513 JOSEPH ABRUZZO CLERK z CIRCUIT COURT FILED: PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL\jOSEPH ABRUZZO. CLERK. 3 27 2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Filing# 147648602 E-Filed 04/13/2022 04:15:38 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC, Publisher of the PALM BEACH POST, Plaintiff, V. DA VE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida; SHARON R. BOCK, as Clerk and Comptroller of Palm Beach County, Florida. Defendants. I -----------'------- CASE.NO.: 19-CA-014681 AMENDED & SUPPLEMENT AL AFFIDAVIT OF ATTORNEYS' FEES & COSTS ST A TE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF NASSAU BEFORE ME,- the undersigned authority appeared Douglas A. Wyler, Esq., who, after being first duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. Affiant is a partner of JACOBS, SCHOLZ & WYLER, LLC, counsel for Defendant, DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida, ("Aronberg"), as well as general counsel to the Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association, ("FPAA"), and makes . this Affidavit of his own personal knowledge. 2. Affiant is licensed to practice law in the State of Florida, is an active member of the Florida Bar in good standing and has engaged in the practice of law in the State of Florida since 2015. 3. As detailed herein, the services rendered by Affiant and his firm pertain to Affiant's demand letter and motion for attorneys' fees sent to Plaintiffs counsel pursuant to § 57.105, Florida Statutes, on June 8, 2020, in defending against Count I of Plaintiffs Amended Complaint, Party JOINT Joint Exhibit ID# . ...J1L EV#J:s.3. I DATEADMITTED: q/fc_/2o2Cl' , Case No. 2019-CA-014681 CA/Aronberg-001513 JosEPH AsRuzzo cLERK CIRCUIT COURT · : FILED: PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL~SEPH ABRUZ 0, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM J33 Plaintiff s October21, 2020 Notice of Dropping State Attorney, Daye Aronberg from the above- captiohed lawsuit, and Defendant Aronberg’s Amended Motion for Attorneys’ Fees filed on November 9, 2020. See, Exhibits “A”, “B”, and “C” attached hereto. 4. The total, time Affiant’s law firm has expended services rendered to date is 161.1 hours; however, from the date of Defendant Aronberg’s 57.105 demand, Affiant’s law firm has expended a total of 129 hours. 5. Ofthe 129 hours expended since Defendant Aronberg’s 57.105 demand was served, the total time Affiant has expended services rendered to date is 116.2 hours at the rate of $425.00 per houn Likewise, the total time Affiant’s law partner, Arthur I, Jacobs, has expended services rendered to date is 12.8 hours at the rate of$475.00 per hour. 6. Accordingly; since Defendant Aronberg’s 57.105: demand was served. Defendant Aronberg’s counsel, JACOBS, SCHOLZ & WYLER, LLC, has rendered services in the amount of $55,465.00 (calculated at 116.2 hours x $425.00/ hour + 12.8 hours x $475.00/hour), in conjunction with, the defense of the instant action pursuant to § 57.105, Florida Statutes. See, Exhibit “D” attached hereto. 7. Affiant expects to incur an additional 15.0 hours at:$425.00 an hour in preparing for, traveling to, and attending the hearing on attorneys’ fees. Thus, the total amount of hourly attorneys’ fees the State Attorney is seeking is 144 hours for a total of $61,840.00 (calculated at 131.2 hours x $425.00/hour + 12.8 hours x $475.00). 8. In addition to the legal fees, Affiant’s law firm incurred expenses for costs during the defense ofDefendant Aronberg. These costs include, the costs taxable pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 57.041 and total $1,482.77. Affiant expects to incur an additional $800.00 in costs relating to the proceeding on Defendant Aronberg’s Ariiended Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. Thus, the CA/AropfpgjO^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Plaintiffs October 21, 2020 ,Notice of propping St_ate Attorney, Da:ve Aronbe~g-from the abo\,~- . captioned lawsuit,. and Defendant j\rnribetg's, Amend~d Motion for Attorneys' Fees. filed on . . . November 9.2020. ·See.Exhibits. ':4.'' ''B;; and "C" atiached'/1ereto. . . . ~ . .. ' ' . .. - . .. ·-. , ' , .. , .. , . . . , - . • . . . . : 4, The total. time Affiant's la\vfirm has expended services rendered to date ,is 16Ll hours: however. from~he date ofDefendant Aronb.erg;s 57.rns demand. Affiant's law firm has .,,. . ,, . -. . . .. - ~- . . ,.,.,.__ ---_ expende(! a total 0(129 bour~. 5. Of the 1'29 hours expended since DefendantAronbetg' s 5 7.105 demand was served, . . the total time Affiant has expeµded servic:e_~ rendered to date is i 16:2 hours at the rate of $4,ZS.00 . . per hour,_ l,1ke\vise, th·e tofal time·Affiant's law partn~r, Arthur I., Jaco_bs; bas expended services rendered to date is 12.8 hours .at the rate of $475.00 per bout; 6. Accordingly; since Defendant Arnnberg'~ 5'o/. 105 demand was served_, Defendant Aronberg's counsel; JACOBS, .SCHOLZ:& WYLER, LLC, has rendered servic~s in the amount· . . . - of $55,465.00 (calculated at 116.2 hours x $425:001 hour + 12.8 hours x $475.00/hour:), in conjunction ,vith. the defense of the inst~nt aptio.n purst1at.1t to§. 57.1 OS, Florida Statutes. See, Exhibit '~D" aitaclted her.eto. 7. Affiant expects to incur an additional 1-5.0 hours at: $425;00:an hour in preparing for~ traveling to, ·ancfattending the bearing on attorm:ys'· fees. Thus, the total amount of hourly attorneys' foes the State Attorney is seekirtg}s.144 :hours for a.'total of$6J,840.00 (calculated at 131.2 hours x $425.00/hour + 12.8 pours x $4 75,00). 8. In addition to the legal fees, Affiant'-s law firm incurred expenses for costs during the defense of Defendant Aronberg. These costs include. the costs taxable putsuai:J.tto Fla. Stat § _ _ 57._041 anci total $:lA~i:n. ,A._f6J1Qt exp~Pt~ tP.:.!Qf!:IT an ~ddition~l. $,~()0.Q9 in cg~!_s rel~ting to the proceeding on Defendant Arcinberg's Amended Motion for Attotneyf Fees and Costs. Thus, the CA/Aro~fi:m5?i~5c~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM total amount of costs sought to be reimbursed herein total $2,282.77. See, Exhibit “D” attached hereto. 9. The attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by Affiant’s law firm on behalfof Defendant Aronberg are reasonable. Moreover, the hourly rate charged to the client was reasonable .for this geographic region as was the time and labor required, the. skill requisite to. perform the legal services properly, the: experience, reputation, and ability of the attorneys, the amount in controversy, and the results obtained. Dated this 12th day of April’- 2022; FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. . . / / Q // STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF NASSAU The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me by means of physical appearance this 12th day of April, 2022. by Douglas A. Wyler, Esquire, who is personally known to me and who did i - TARAN fi JACKSON 'Notary Ptthlir.. r SiahaturexffNotay Public- State of Florida Bonded through National Notary Assn. Name typed, printed or stamped CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I .HEREBY CERTIFY that oh this 12fh day of April, 2022, a. copy of the foregoing Amended & Supplemental Affidavit of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs has been electronically filed with the Florida E-File .Portal for e-service on all parties of record herein. JACOBS SCHOLZ & WYLER, LLC /s/Douglas A. Wyler CA/ArOfft®BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY total amount of costs sought to .be reimbursed herein tota_l $2,i82.77. See, Exllibit ~D" attached .hereto. 9. The a,ttoineys' fees anci costs incu·r:red by Affiant' s 'law firm:on behalf of Defendant Ar.ortb~rg .are reasonable•. Moreovet,the hourly rate charged to the clieni was reasonable for this geographic region as was .the time and' labor required, the. skill requisite to. perform the legal s<::rvices p~operiy, the: expederi.ce, reputation1 and &b1lity of the attorneys, the amount in ~ontroversy, and the result'sobtained. • Dated this 12th day of April~. 2022: FURTHER AFF(ANT, SAY.ETH-NOT, STATE OF FLORIDA . COUN,JY OF NASSAU The foregoing instrument ~as acknowledged before me by means ofphysical appearance this. 12th day of April, 20'22, by Douglas A. Wyler, Esquire, who is, personally known to me and • who did • oath. • • Si Name typed, printed otstamped CERffiFICATE OF,SERVICE I J:IEREBY CERTIFY that: on this 12th day of April, 2022, a. copy of the foregoing Amended & Supplemental Affidavit ofAftomeys: Fe.es and-Costs has been electronically filed with the-Florida E-File .Portal for e-servite on all parties of record ·herein. Isl Douglas A. Wyler CA/Aro?ft:ffl5?i~~:M BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM Arthur I. Jacobs, Esq. Fla. Bar No.: 10249 Richard J: Scholz, Esq. Fla; Bar No.: 0021261 Douglas A. Wyler, Esq, Fla. Bar No.: 119979 961687 Gateway Blvd., Suite 201-1 Fernandina Beach, Florida 32034 (904)261-3693 (904) 261-7879 Fax Primary: [email protected] Attorneysfor Defendant, Dave Aronberg CA/Aropfg^gl BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3 27 2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY ;: Arthur,J. Jacobs; Esq. Fill. Bar No.: 10249 • • Richc,trd i Scholz, Esq. Fla,li~No.: bo212~1 D~HJgfas A. \1/yler, Esq, Fla, B~r No,: I l-997Q~ • . . 961687 Gate\vay Blvd.; Suite201-I , Fernandina Beach; Florida 32034 (904) 261-3693 ' ' (904) 26i~7879 Fax Priuiary:jac~bsscholzia:[email protected] Attorneys for Defendant, Dave Aroitberg i 1 .. CA/Aropfi:ffu~iJ\.~~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3./27/2023 4:20:48 PM EXHIBIT “A” EXHIBIT “A” CA/Aroi^^O^I^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY EXHIBIT "A''' EXHIBIT "A'' CA/AropfL8Ei?~Ai¼ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM THE LAW OFFICES OF JACOBS & ASSOCIATES, P.A. ARTAuR-i. JACOBS I Jacobs Scholz & Wyler, blc. A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY OF PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW GATEWAY TO.AMELIA 96.1687 GATEWAY BLVD.-, SUITE 2014 Fernandina Beach, FloridA 32O34 TELEPHONE.(904) 261-3693 FAX NO. (904) 261-7 87 9 RICHARD j. SCHOLZ, P.A; RICHARD-J. SCHOLZ DOUGLAS A. WYLER, P.A. DOUGLAS A. WYLER’ June 8, 2020 VIA ELECTRONIC & U.S. MAIL Stephen A. Mendelsohn, Esq. Greenburg Traurig, P.A. 5100 Town Center Circle, Suite 400 Boca Raton, FL 33486 RE: CA Florida Holdings, LLC v. Dave Aronberg et al. Palm Beach County, Case No.: 2019-CA-014681 Dear Mr. Mendelsohn: As you are aware our firm represents the interests of Dave Arohberg, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida, in the above referenced matter. The purpose of this letter is to demand the voluntary.' dismissal of;your First Amended Complaint, (the "Complaint"), dated January 17,2020, This demand is made pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes. As you know, Section 57.105 provides: (.1) Upon the court’s Initiative or motion of any party, the. court shall award a reasonable attorney’s fee; including prejudgment interest, to' be paid to the prevailing party7 in equal amounts by the losing party and the losing party’s attorney on any claim or defense at any time during a civil proceeding or action in which the court finds that the losing party or the losing party’s attorney knew or should have known that a claim or defense when initially' presented to the court or at any time before trial:' a. Was not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claim or defense; or b. Would hot be supported by the application of then-existing law to those material facts. Today, Judge Marx granted, with prejudice, Defendant Aronberg’s Motion to Dismiss Count II of the. Plaintiffs Complaint; Pursuant to the Court’s ruling, the Plaintiff’s only remaining cause of action consists of Count I, for Declaratory Relief, Accordingly, we believe that the Complaint filed herein and its sole remaining Count for Declaratory' Relief is not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claims asserted, and that your claims are not supported by the application of current law to said material facts. CA/Ar°pfi®qm BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY i JAcoas ScaoLz & WnEa, I/LC-: A LIMITED,LIABILITY'COMPANY,OF PROfE.5,SIONA_L A,SSOCIA_T[O_NS: ATTORNEYS AT LAW GAT'E.'NAY .. TO AMELIA THE LAW,.OFFICES OF JA,C0!3S &_ ASSOCI_ATES, P.A. AR.Tl~iUR i .. JACOBS 96,1687 GAT'CNf,Y sµvo,_. SUITE 201:f FER,_.._A...'IDINA BEACH; F'LoRIDA.32034 June 8,2020 VIA ELECTRONIC & U.S. MAIL· Stephen A. Mendelsohn, Esq. _Greenburg Traurig, P.A. 5100 Towi1 Centet'Circie, Suite 400 BocaRaton, FL33489 .TELEP1:iONE{90,4l 261-3693- l"AX NO, (904_) 261,-7879 RE: CA Fiorida:Holdfogs, ~LCv. Dav~Aronberg ~t al. Palm Beach County, Case No.: .2019-€A-0l4681 Dear Mt. Mendelsohn: Rl6iARD j, sct-io'Lz, PA RICHARb.J. s·cHOLZ ·oo'UGLAS A. WYLER, P.A. Oou·GLAS A. w:VLER' As yoLJ ::i.re a.ware our firfn represents the ·interests of Dave Aroiiberg; as State Attorney of Palm I{each County, Florida, in,the above refereoced matter. The purpose ofthis letter is to de,nand the voluntary dismis~al of:your First Amended Complaint, (the ·"Complaint"), dated January 17, 2020. This demand is, made pursu~nt:to se~tfon 57 .105, Fiorida _Statutes. • • As you know, Section 57.105 provides: (I) Upon the court's initiative or motion of any party, the. courj: shall award a reasonable :attorney's fee; including prejudgment interest, to· be paid !O the prevailing party in eqllal amo.uhts by the losing party arid the.losing party's attorney, on any claim ot d.efe_nse at any time during a civil proceeding- or action in which the c9qrt fi11ds tba_t the lo~ing party or tbe losing party's atto.rney koew or $hould have known that a claim or defensewh~n initially presented to the court or at any time before trial:' • a. Was not supported by thematerfal facts necessary to establish the claim or defense; ,or - b. Would hot be supported by the application of then-existing_ law to those material facts. • Today, Judge Marx gnmted, with prejudice, Defendant Aronberg's Motion to Oisiniss CoL11,1i II of the Plaintiff's Complaint Pursuant to ~he Court's ruling, the Plaintiff's only remaining· ca1,1~e of.a~tion consists of Count I, for Declaratory Relic( Acc9rdi!1.gly, we beilcvc tbat ths: Compl::i.int fiicd herdn and its sole·remifriirig (fount' foi-.beclaratory Re fief is· riotsupportecf by the inateria!Tacfa necess~ry:to · establish the claims asserted, and that your claims are not supported by the application of current law to said material facts. • ., CA/Ar0f,1il~?~l\~~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM First and foremost, the Complaint is not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claims asserted because neither Defendant Aronberg, nor The Office of the. State Attorney for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit is in custody or control of the 2006 grand jury materials sought therein. Simply put, the .declaratory relief sought by the Plaintiff, seeks- records from my client that are impossible for him or his office to produce. Accordingly, Defendant Aronberg is not a proper party to this action because no matter what, he and his office do not have possession, custody, or control ofthe requested materials. In addition to the foregoing material facts that negate the claims asserted in the Complaint, your claims are also not supported by the application ofcurrent law. Specifically, your action for declaratory relief fails based.on the. clear, unambiguous statutory language found in Section 905.27(2), Florida Statutes, which states: When such disclosure is ordered by a court pursuant to subsection (1)for use in a civil case, it may be disclosed to all parties to the case and to their attorneys and by the latter to their legal associates and employees. However. /Tie grand jury testimony, afforded such persons by the coudcan only be used in the defense or prosecution ofthe civil or criminal case andfor no otherpurpose whatsoever. Moreover, evenifthe Plaintiff were to prevail in the declaratory action, Mr. Aronberg would be unable to comply with any court order granting disclosure of the requested documents because neither Mr. Aronberg nor The Office of the State Attorney for the Fifteenth Judicial: Circuit have possession, custody , or control of the 2006 Epstein grand jury records. Based on the foregoing, if the Complaint is not dismissed within 21 days of the service of this letter, the enclosed Motion for Attorney’s Fees-will be filed and we will seek as sanctions, from your client and your firm, recovery ofthe legal expenses incurred in defending.this frivolous action. Please govern yourself accordingly^ Douglas A. Wyler, Esq.. For the Firm Encl.: Defendant’s Motion for Attorneys’.Fees CA/AroPheffiQ^B BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY First a11cl foremQst, the Complaint is· notsupportecl pythe materiai facts necessary to estabi\sh the claims asserted because neither Defendant Aronberg, .nor The- Office- of the. State Attorm~y for the Fifteenth Judi~ial Circuit is in custody or control of the 2006 grand jury materials sought therein. Simply put, the .declaratory relief sought by the_ Plaintiff; seeks: re'cords 'from my cli~nt that are impossible for him or his offic_e to produce. Accordingly, Defendant Atonb.erg is nota proper party to this action because no matter what, he and his office do not have possession, cusfody, or control of the requested materials. lh 11dcHtio11 (o the fqregoipg'l)1_a.t_e~ia! facts that 11ega.t~ the cla.inJs !l5ser:tedjr1 the Compi11int; your cl11ims: are also not supported by·the application of current law._ Speclficafly, your action for declaratory ref fo:f fails based on the clear, unambiguous statutory language found in Section 9,05.27(2), Florida Statutes, which states: • • • -- When such disclosure is or:de_red qy a court pursuant to subsection (l)Jor use in a civil case, it may be disclosed to all partiesJo the case :and to their attorneys and by the latter to their lt:galassoc;!ates -and employees. However, the grand iury testimony afforded such persons by the courtcanonly be•usedin the defense or prosecution o[the civil or criminal case and for no· other purpose whatsoever, • Moreover, even:ifihePlaintiffweretoprevailin the declaratory action, Mr. Aronberg would be unable to. comply with. any court order granting disclosure of the requested documents bemuse neither Mr. Atonberg .nor The Office of the State Attorney for .the Fifteenth )udicial Circuit. have- possession, custody, or control ofthe2Q06 Epstein grand juryre<;ords. Based on the foregoing, if the Complaint is not dismissed \\,ithin 21 qays of the-service of this letter, the enclosed Motion for Att9rney;s Fees. \,;ill be filed and we \Viii seek as sanctions, from_your dient and your firm, recovery ofthe legal expenses incurred in defendin~.this frivolous action. Please g.· ov. em yourself acc~."'g.2___ ly fxr-k•-r Ooug)a~ A Wyler, E$q .. For-the Fjrm Encl.: Defendanf s Mod on for Attorneys' Tees CA/Aropifm5?i~~M BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC, Publisher of the PALM BEACH POST, Plaintiff, v. CASE NO.: 19-CA-014681 DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida: SHARON R. BOCK, as Clerk and Comptroller of Palm Beach County, Florida. Defendants. - ' / DEFENDANT, DAVE ARONBERG’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES Defendant, DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida, by and through the undersigned attorneys, moves the Court, pursuant to Florida Statutes, Section 57.105, to award him reasonable attorneys’ fees for the defense of Plaintiff s First Amended Complaint, (the “Complaint”), and as grounds therefor, would show that on June 8,2020, Plaintiffwas served a copy of this Motion, together with a letter from the undersigned attorney, in accordance with subsection (4) of the above Statute, demanding dismissal of the Complaint, at least 21 days prior to the filing ofthis Motion. In said letter, Defendant’s attorney advised Plaintiffofthe facts which establish that the Complaint is without support of the facts or the law. WHEREFORE, Defendant, DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida, respectfully requests the Court enter an Order requiring Plaintiff arid Plaintiffs attorneys to pay said Defendant’s attorneys’ fees incurred herein after service ofthis Motion. I CA/Arop^e^O^I^! BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY .. " ~ ,. I l I : i ·1 . IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE:FTFTEENTHJUbICiiL CIRCUIT • IN AND FOR PALM '.BEACH COUNTY, FLORII?A CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS,,LLC, - Publisher ()fthe PALM BEACH POST, Plaintiff, y. . ".. : . ~- ---- . ' . DA VE ARONB,ERG, as State Attorney of Palm Bea~h County, Florida; SHARON R. BOCK as ClerkancfCornptroller of Palm Be;1ch Co@ty, Fiprid~. Qefendanfa'. I ~--------,--------,------ CASE NO.: i9-CA-Qi468J i>EFENDA.~T, DA VE ARONBERG'S MOTION FOR_ATTORNEYS' FEES Defendant, DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of PalrriBeach County; Florida,byand through the undersigned attorneys, moves the Court, pursuant to Florida Statutes, Section 57-105, t_o award' him reasonable, attorneys' fees for the de fens~ of Pla1:nt1ffs First: Amernied Complaint, __ (the ''Complaint'.'), and as grounds therefor, would show that on June 8, 2020, Plaintiff was served .a copy of this Motion, togetlwr: with a letter from the µnclersigned attorney, "i'n accordance with subsection ( 4.) of the above Statute, demanding dismissal of the Cotnplamt, at ·1east 2_1 days prior to the filing of this Motion. In said letter, .nefen9ant's,attorney advised Plaintiff of the facts which. • establi~h thcJ..t the Col)lplaint is. with_ollt support of the f~ct-$ oi: the law. -- WHEREFORE, Defendant, DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm I3~ach County, Florida, respectfully requests the Court eriter an Order requiring Plaintiff arid Plaintiff's . ' attomeys to p_ay said_ De(endant' s attorneys' fees incurreci l).erein after service of _this _Motion. CA/Arop~~9>hq:__,2i(h BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE j I hereby certify that on this day 2020, the foregoing was electronically filed via the Florida E-File Portal for electronic service on the parties of record herein. JACOBS SCHOLZ & WYLER, LLC fs/Douglas A. Wyler Arthur I. Jacobs, Esquire Fla. Bar No.: 108249 Richard J. Scholz, Esquire Fla. Bar No.: 0021261 Douglas A. Wyler, Esquire Fla. Bar No.: 119979 ' 961687 Gateway Blvd., Suite 201 -1 Fernandina Beach, Florida 32034 (904)261-3693 (904)261-7879 [email protected] Attorneysfor Defendant i . CA/Arop^^O^l^^j BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify tba,t on thi.s __ day ___ , 2020., theforegoi11g'.w~ el~ctronically filed via the Florida E-Fiie· Portalfotelectronic service on the parties of record herein. JACOBS SCHOLZ & \VYLER, LLC /sl Dquglas A. Wyler Arthur I. Jacobs, Esquire Fla:_Bar,No,: 1()8249 Richarci J. Scholz, Esq}-lire Fla,.BarNo:: 0021261 Douglas A. Wyler, Esquire Fla .. Bar No.: l 199.79 . 961687 Qateway Blvd., Suite 201 ~I fernm1d_ina'Bea:ch, Ffodda 32034 (904)2.61-3693 (904}261-'78·79 jac:obsscholzla,v@comcast:net Attqn;eysfor Defendant CA/Aro13~?9,J\~2Nf BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM EXHIBIT “B” EXHIBIT “B” CA/Arc¥te?)pPM^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY EXHIBIT ''B'' EXHIBIT ''B" CA/AroPfL~~P~Ai1& BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM - Filing # 115383434 E-Fi led 10/21/2020 04:13:35 PM ■■ IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND . FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA ; CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC, CASENO.: 50-2019-CA-014681-XXXX-MB . Publisher of THE PALMBEACH POST. . . , ' DIVISION: AG . . . C- : : Plaintiff, , .„ v.. . - . " ? ■ , DAVE ARONBERG. as State Attorney of - . Palm Beach County, Florida; SHARON R. BOCK, as Clerk and Comptroller of Palm Beach County, Florida,. Defendants. . PLAINTIFF CA HOLDINGS, LLC’S NOTICE OF DROPPING STATE ATTORNEY, DAVE ARONBERG ' Plaintiff, CA HOLDINGS, LLC, pursuant to Fla. R. Civ. P. 1250(b), hereby notifies the parties that ■it has dropped State.Attorney, Dave Aronberg from the above case. Respectfully submitted, GREENBERG TRAURIG, P.A. Attorneysfor CA Florida Holdings, LLC, Publisher of The Palm Beach Post Stephen A. Mendelsohn. Esq. 401 East Las Ola's. Boulevard Suite 2000 Boca Raton, Florida 33486 Telephone: (561) 955-7629 Facsimile: (561) 338-7099 By: is/ Stephen A. Mendelsohn__ STEPHEN A. MENDELSOHN Florida Bar No. 849324 [email protected] smith [email protected] ELService@atlawicom CA/Aro|$(^0$^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY ., · • :pfrhfo iiit538343'4 E.:Filed. ib1211202fro~::I3:3.S· PM ·' • • • I:>:-:·· •. ·, .• ... • ·.>.--:, •• . ·. ·' .... •• ••.•• ·. ·... . •. • .... · . . • TN THE,9IRQUIT·COlJRT;OWffI,E .... HFTEEN1'H JUDICIAL CIRCUIT fN AND • , FOR PALM.BEACH'c:Oill\JTY:,fLOTUDA • .. •. . ·=. . . · .. • .·• . --- .. ,• . ,: . -•. " .,_ -, ~ • ' .• ~A FLORiOAHOLDINGS; LLC, . . Publisher ofTHEPALAi-BEACH POST . • . . ·.. . -: ,· . . . . , . - . -- _ .. - . - . CASE NO.: so.:2019~cA-01468l~xxxx-MB . ~ .- • . . . . . • . . . • - . Plaintiff,. V .. · DAVE.ARONBE~G, as State Attorney of . • .Palm Beach C~ctnty, Flod4a; SHARON It • BOCK, as Clerk and Comptroller of Palm' . s·eacn Qounty, Florida,: , • • • • • Defendants. . . .. PLAiNTIF'F CA HO.LDiNGS, LLC'S NOTiCE OF DROPPING STA TE ATTORNEY, DA VE ARONBERG :. 'Pla1nt1ff; Cf:. HOLDINGS? LLC,pursuant to Fla,·R .. Civ. p: i':2:,0(b), hereby'n6tifiesthe parties that · .it has dropped State Atfome)', Dave Aronberg from the above case. ~espectfullysubmitted, GREENBERG TRAURIG, P~A. · Aito,rneysfo; CA Florida Holdings. _LLC, Pziblisher . of The Pglrn Be.ach Post • . . . . . .. Stephen A. 'Me_ndelsohn; Esq. 40 I East Las Oliis. Boulevard Suit~ 2000 Bo~a RatonJlorjda 33486 Telephone: (56 i) 955-7629 Facsimile: (56 i) 3J8-7.099 • By: _!.\/Stephen A. Mendeisohn . STEPHEN k MENDELSOH.N Florida· Ba~ Nq. 849324 • m~ndeisohnsrti.'igtlaw .com ' sni ith frwLrtla\\i.COlil ELServiceial!!tlaw.toni CA/Arop~?~J\q_,2M BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I By: hlMichaelJGrvsiel_1 _ MICHAEL J GRYGIEL . ‘ (Admitted Pro Hue Vice) . 54 State St., 6th Floor Albany. New York 12207 Telephone: (518) 689-1400 Facsimile: (518) 689-1499 ' - . - ; By: h! NinaD.Bovajiari_ NINA D. BQYAJIAN (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) 1840 Century Park East, Suite 1900 Los Angeles California 90067 ' Telephone: (310) 586-7700 Facsimile: (310) 586-7800 bovaj [email protected] [email protected] CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that oh this.2 Ist day of October, 2020, a true and correct copy ofthe foregoing has been filed with,the Clerk of the Court using the State of Florida e.-filing system, which will send a notice of electronic service for all parties of record herein /s/Stephen A. Mendelsohn _ STEPHEN A, MENDELSOI IN Active 533i734ivi 2 i CA/Aropfp^O^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY By: Isl-Michael J Gn;gi~l -MICHAEL J GRYGIEL, (Adniitted Pro. Hat Vice) 54 State,St:,' 6thFloor . _ Albany, Ne\vY6rk 12207 ••• Telephone: (518) 6~9~·1400 - Fac~im.ile": (518) 6&9:J 499 -grvf!ielm(@gtlakco11-1 • -·. -. .• -- .... ·• ; ·By: /s! Nina D. B~~aii~Ji • • NINA D.- BQYAJJAN (Adm.ihe<:i P,:o HacYice) 1840 _century Park East, Suite 1900 - LosAng~Ies Califomia,9(5067 - -Teleph9ne: (310) 58~-'7700 Facs1iniie: (310)'586~7800 :bo,,aj 1ar\[email protected] riVeraal(@gtlaw.conY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CER:TiFYthat oii this.21 st day of'Ottobef,2020; a true-and correct copy of the . . . . , . .. . ' . .. . . • foregoing has been filed with. the Cferk of the Court using the State of Florida e,,fi-ling system, which will send. a notice of ~!edronic service fo_r all parties of record herein • Isl StephenA. MerideNohn STEPHEN A.:MENQ~[_,SOJ::IN AGTIVE53317341v1 2 CA/AropPcfR5?i°h~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM EXHIBIT “C” EXHIBIT “C” CA/ArWg?jQ?J®^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3 27 2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY EXHIBIT "C'' EXHIBIT "C'' CA/AroPfi~iP~>i.i~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM INTHECIRCUITCOURTOFTHEFIFTEENTHJUDICIALCIRCUIT INANDFORPA LMBEACHCOUNTY.FLORIDA / CAFLORJDAHOLD1NGS.LLC, PublisherofthePALMBEACHPQST, Plaintiff, v. CASENO.:19 -CA-0.14681 DAVEARONBERG.asStatc, Attorncyof PalmBeachCountyyHorida;SEL\RO BOGK,asClerkandCbrriptrbllerbfPalrri Defendants._i DEFENDANTDAVEARONBERG’SAMEN'DEDMOTIONFORATTORNEYS’FEES Defendant, DAVEARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida, by and through the undersigned counsel, hereby moves this Honorable Court, pursuant to Rule 1 ;525, Fla. R. Civ. P. to enter an award of attorneys’ fees in his favor against Plaintiff; GA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC, publisher, of the PALM BEACH POST; and in support thereof states the following: BASISFORAWARDINGATTORNEYS’FEES 1. On November 14, 2019, CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC, publisher ofthe PALM BEACH POST (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida (the “State Attorney” or “Defendant Aronbcrg”) and SHARON R. BOCK, as Clerk arid Comptroller of Palm Beach County, Florida (the “Clerk”). The basis of the action was asking the Court to order the State Attorney and the Clerk to disclose the 2006 Jeffrey .Epsteingrandjurymaterials,(the“RequestedMaterials”),pursuantto§905,27(l)Fla.S^^ CA/Aropj^O^^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY _INTHECIE.CUITC0URTQFT-HEFIFIEENTHJUDJClALCIR¢UIT INAt~I>FQRPA LMI3EACHCOUNTYSLORJDA • CAFLC)RIDAHOLDINGS,LLC, PublisherofthePAiJviBEACHPO,$t, Plaintiff~ DA VEARONBERG,asState, AttorIJ.eyof ~.almBefwhCQµnty;Jlorid11;SHARONR BOCK,a:sClerkandCompfrolletofPalm BeacbCouhiy;Floricta .. Defendants. i --------------- GASENO.:19 -CA-0."14681 DEFENDANTDAVEARONBERG~SAMENDEDMOTIONFORATTORNEYS'FEES through the undersigned c_ounsd, hereby moves this Honorable Court; pursuant fo'Rule, 1525-, fll=L R. Civ. P. to enter an award of attorneys' fees in his favor against Plai'ntiff; CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC, publisher of the PALM BEACH POST; ;uid in ,sµpportthereof s_t~tes the following: BASISFORA WARDINGATTORl'IEYS 'FEES I.. On. November 14, 2Q.l 9, CA FLQlUDA HOLOJNGS, LLC;_publisher of the PALM BEACH POST (''Plaintiff') filed a complaint a~ainst DA VE ARON BERG; as State Attorney of Palm Be~ch Cowity, Florid? (the ''.State Attorney" or ''Defendan_t A.ronberg;') ~n4 SJ:MRON R. BOCK; as Clerk and Comptr:ollet of Paltn:B.each County; Florida {the "Clerk"). The basis of the action- was asking the Court to: order the State Attorney and the Clerk to disclose the 2006 Jeffrey .E pst~i11grandj,urymatedal ~,(the"Requ~st~dMiiteriafs "),pursuantto§ 90 5 ,2 7 (1 ) Ffa. S t{l.t. CA/Arcp~~iJ\t~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM 2. On December 6, 2019, the State Attorney filed his Motion to Dismiss, then on December 13, 2019, the Clerk also filed a.Motion to Dismiss. In response, Plaintiff filed its First Amended Complaint on January 17, 2020, which in addition to its original claim under § 905.27 Fla. Stat. (Count II) added a claim for Declaratory Relief (Count I) that sought an Order declaring that the State Attorney and the Clerk disclose the Requested Materials to; Plaintiff for the purpose ofinformingthepubije. 3. On January 24,2019, both the State; Attorney and. the Clerk filed their Answer to the First Amended Complaint and Motion to Dismiss Count 11 (“Answer/Motipn to Dismiss), Notably, the State Attorney’s Answcr/Motion to Dismiss asserted its right to attorneys’ fees for defendingtheactib nandrcquestedsuchrclicffromtheCourt. 4, On June 8, 2020, the Court entered its Order Granting Defendants. Motions to DismissCountIlofPlaintifrsFirstAmendcdCompraintwithPrejudicc(“Order”). 5. Immediately following the Court’s Order, on June 8, 2020, the State Attorney, through the undersigned counsel, served. Plaintiff with a demand pursuant to § 57.105 Fla. Stat., to voluntary dismiss/withdraw the First Amended Complaint and the claims against the State Attorney, along with a Motion for Attorneys’ Fees (“57.105 Demand”). See, Exhibit “A”. Specifically, because of the Court’s Order only Count I of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint remained,whichsbughtDeclafatbryRehefundef§86.011,Fla.Stat. 6. Here, in properly serving his 57.105 Demand on Plaintiff, the State Attorney also properly put Plaintiff on notice that he would seek sanctions by filing the 57.105 Motion for Attorneys’ Fees if Plaintiff failed to: dismiss the remainder of its First Amended Complaint within 21 daysofscrviccofthc57.1.05Dcmandand Mbtionfo.r Attorneys’ Fees. CA/Aropj^O^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY 2. On Dec:ember 6~ 2019, the State Attorney filed his, Motiop to Dismiss, then on December 13, 2019, the Clerk also filed a,Motion to Dismiss. fo response, Plairttifffiled its'First AQ1en,ded Col)1plaint on.Janu,ary 17, 2Q2_Q,.w}J.ich in ~d4itioµ, tQ its qrigu;ialclai111 und~r § 90~.-27 Fla. Stat. (Count II) added a cfaim fcft"'Dcclaratory Relief (Count I) that sought an otdet declaring that the State Attorney and the Clerk disclose the· Requested Materials to. Plaintiff for the purpose ofinforn1ingthepuhUc. 3. On January 24, 2019, both. the State: Attorney and. the Clerk filed their Answer to the First Amen~l~c:l. Complaint an~ Motion to Dismi~s Co4nt II ("An~wer/Moti9n to bismis~), Notably, the State Attorney's Answer/Motion to Dismiss ass:erted its tight .fo attorneys' fees for defendingtheactio ·nandtequestedsuchrelieffrorhtheCourt. 4. bn. Jµn~ 8, 2020, the: Co:urt entereci it5 Qrc;I~r Gr!}ntinR Defendants, Motio_ns to .Disn1issCountllofPlaintiff'sfirstAmendedCM1plainfwithP,rejudice("Order''): 5. Immediately following· the Courfs Order, on June 8, 2020, the State Attorney, through the µnd'ersigned 9ot1nsel, servc.::d. :Plaintiff with. a dem:and pursuant to § 5 7 .105 Fh1.. Stat., to voluntafy dismiss/\'vithdtaw· the First Amended Complaint. and the daims against the State Attorn~y, along w'ith a Motion Jor Attorneys' Fees {"57, 105' Demand;'). See, Exitlblt ''A;;_ Spe:cifrcally, b·ecaus~ of the Court's Order only Count J pf Plaintiffs, Amended Complaint temained,\vhichsoughtDetlaratoryReliefundet§86.0l l ,Fla.Stat 6. He.re, in properiy servingh1s ~7.105, D~mand 011- Plaintiff, .the State. Attorney a}sq properly put Pfaintiff on notice that_:he would seek sartctio·ns by filing the· 57.105 Motion. for Attorneys; Fees ff Plaintiff failed to: dismiss the remainder·ofits 'Efrst Amended Complaint within 2 l daysofser.vi9eofthe57 J.05Dem~nd~.nd M0Jio11fo.r Attorneys' Fees. . 2 CA/Aro~ifms?i~9_¾ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM 7. On June 23, 2020, Plaintiff’s counsel sent a response to the 57.105 Demand refusihgtowithdrawtheremairiderofthe. First AmcndedComplaint. See,Exhibit“B” . 8. §57.105,FlpridaStatutesstatcsthcfollowing: A motion by a party seeking sanctions under this section must be served but may not be filed with or presented to the court unless, within 21 days aftet service of the: motion, the challenged paper, claim, defense, contention, allegation, or denial is not withdrawnorappropriatelycorrected. 9. Accordingly, after receiving Plaintiff’s June 23, 2020, response refusing to withdraw the remainder of the First Amended Complaint and waiting the prerequisite “21 days after service of the motion” the State Attorney’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees was filed with this CourtonJuly 1,2020 . See,Exhibit- C”. 10. Thereafter, on August 18, 2020, the State Attorney filed his Motion for Summary Judgment (“Motion”) and proceeded, on October 21,2020, to file a Motion to Set Hearing on the State Attorney’s Motion (“Motion lb Set”) after it became clear that there would be no resolution pfthismatterwithouttheCburt’sintervention. 11. Nonetheless, later the same day, rather than setting and participating in a hearing bn the merits as to. State Attorney’s Motion, Plaintifffiled its Notice of Dropping the State Attorney (“Notice”) from the instant case. See, Exhibit “D”, Asa consequence of filing its Notice, Plaintiff has effectively made an admission, that its allegations against:the State Attorney have no basis in factorlaw. 12, “An essential distinction between a notice of dropping a party and a voluntary dismissal is that the former concludes the action as to the dropped party while the latter is generally utilized,to conclude the actionin its entirety.” Carter v, Lake. County, 840 So. 2d 1153, 1155 (Fla. 5thDCA2003) . BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY 7. On June 23_, 2020, ,Plaintiff's counsel sent a' response .to the 57.-10_5 Demand refusingtowithdrawtheremairiderofthe, First AmendedComplaint. See;Exhibit"B" . 8,. §57.J 05;Fl9ri(laStaJµtesstatesth~foitowwg: A motion by, a party se:eking sanctions under, this section must b.e s_erved. but may not be file_d with orpr_e·senfed 16 the court u:ntes·s, within.21 clays after: service ofthe motion, the cha.Hehgedpapet,. daitn, defense, coritention, allegation, ot"denial is not wi thdrawnorappropria telycorrected. • 9. Acc.or:dingly~ after receiving Plaintiff's June. 2_3, 202Q, resp:onse refusing Jo withdraw th'e remainder of the First Arnended Complaintand waiting· the prerequisite "21 days after service of th~ motion;;· the :s·tate Att_oQ1ey's Motion for AttQJ]l~ys; Fees Wf!S Uled. witll t~s ColirtortJuly1 ;2020 , See,Exhibii-" CJ\ I 0. Thereafter, on August 'I 8, 2020, the State Attorney filed his Motion for Summary Judgment (''Motiori"} and proceeded, on October 21, 2020, to :file a Motion lo Set Hearing on the State Attorney's Motion. (''Motion. to Set") after it became cleat ihat there ·would be no tes6h.1tio•n ofthisma.tterwithouttheCourt' sinteryention. l 1. 'Nonetheless; later th1;: s_ame- day, rather tlnrn setting and. parlicipl:1Jiog in a b.ear:ing ofi the merits-as to. StateAttorhey'sMotioh, Plaintifffiled its Notice ofDtoppingthe State Attorney has effectively made an admission. that its allegati@s ,against:tlre State Aftomey have no basis in factorlaw. 12. "An essential distinction 'between- a notic_e of dropping a p~r_ty and a voiuntary dismissal is that the fomter c·onch.1.des the action as fothe dfqpped party while.the latter' is generally µtilizecl.to conch,1de the action in its entirety;'' ():u-ter v: Lgke. Cqunty, ~40 SQ. 2d. 11 $3, 1155 (Fla. 5thDCA2003) .- 3: CA/Arof?ft:ffl5?~A.~2A BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM 13. Specifically, Plaintiffs Notice states: “Plaintiff, [sic]f pursuant to Fla. R-. Civ. P. 1.250(b),. hereby notifies the parties that it has' dropped State Attorney, Dave Aronberg from the abovecase.” 14; Rule 1.250(b), F1a. R.Civ.P.states: (b) Dropping- Parties. Parties may. be dropped by an adverse party, in the manner providedfor voluntary dismissal in rule 1..420(a)(1) subject to the exception stated in that rule. If notice oflis pendens has been filed in the action against a party so dropped, the' notice of dismissal shall be recorded and cancels the notice of lis pendens without the necessity of a court order-: Parties may be dropped by order of court on its: own initiative or the motion of any party at any stage of the action on suchtermsasarejust. 15. Rulel .420(a)(1),Fla.R.Civ.P.,Volunt aryDismissalstates: (I) By Parties. Except in actions in which property has been seized of is in the custody of the court, an action, a claim, or any part of an action orclaim may be dismissed by plaintiff without order of court (A) before trial by serving,: or during; trial by stating on the record, a notice of dismissal at any time before a hearing on motion for summaryjudgment, or ifnone is- served or if the motion is denied, before retirement of thejury in a case tried before ajury or before submission of a nonjury case to the court for decision, of (B) by filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all current parties to the action. Unless otherwise stated in the. notice or stipulation, the dismissal is without:prejudice, except that a notice ofdismissal operates as an adjudication on the merits when served by a plaintiffwho has once dismissed in anycourtanactionbasedonorincludingthesameclaim 16. Notably, “[RJule 1.250(b) expressly incorporates the procedural aspects of Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.420(a)(1) governing voluntary dismissal by providing that parties may be dropped ‘in the mariner provided for voluntary dismissal in rule 1.420(a)(1) subject to the exceptionstatedinthatrule, Siboniy,Alien, 52So,3d779,780(Fla.5thDCA2010). 1'7 . Likewise, because Rule 1.250(b) specifies that a party is dropped “in the manner provided for voluntary dismissal in Rule 1.420(a)(1), the Siboni court concluded that “the manner” includes the same entitlement to costs and attorney’s fees which would have been enjoyed had the dismissal occurredcntirclyunderRule 1.420(a)(1). Id.at781. 4 CA/Aropj^-O^^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY 13, Specific.ally, Plaintiff's. Notice states: "Plaintiff~ [sic]i purstiantto Fla. Ra Ci\". P. 1.250(b),, hereby notifies the parti'es that it has~ dropped State-Attorney, Dave Aronbetg, from ·the abovecas.e. '' 14, Rulel.2-50(b);Fla,R. Civ.P.states: (b) Dropping- Parties. Parties may be di·opped by an adverse parry in the manner provided/or voluntary dismissal. in rule L420(a)(J) subject to: the exception stated ti). that ~ie. Ifp.qtice • of lis pep.de11s h~s been tited i,n the actfop. ag;:tipst a party· s.o dropped, the; notLce. of dhmissai shall be recorde.d and cance.ls the no(i_ce of if;; peri.deriS without the, necessity of·a court order-: P'ariies nmy b.e dropped by order of c:ouri oh ifs own initiati've ot the. motion of any party at any stage of the, action on suchtermsasarejust. 15. Rµlel A20(a)(J ),Ha.R,.Civ.P.,Volµn_t_ ~ryP_ism1ssaista_tes: (1) 'By Pattie·s. Except in actions in which property has been seized or is in the custody of the court, an action, a claim, or any part of an action ot· claini may be dismissed by plafotiff without order of ccmrt (AY before trial :by serving, or dµring tria'L by stating on the record~ ~ n9tlce of djs.mlssai a( l!ny time before a.hearing o·n motion for-s:un1111aryj11dgrnent, or if none is· serv~d or if the motion is deliied; before retirement' .of the;ju:ry in.a case tried before ajury or before, submission ofa non.jury case to the court fot decision, or (B) by filing: a stipulation of dismissal signed by all current parties to the action. Unless othern1i"se stated.in the noti'ce orstipulatiori, tbe cilsnijssaJ 3s withoutprejudic:e, e.xce.pt (ha.ta noticer:/dismiJsai.opt!rates a$ an qdJ1d.i'c(,ltiQn on t/ig, merits when$erved by a.piafntiftwho hgs onr;e d.zsmissg_d in a,tycoz1rtani1cti0Hbasedo11otfochidiilgthe.ta1neclaz;u 16. "Notably; ,f[R]ule 1.250(b) expressly incorporates the procedural aspects of'Florida ,R,ule of Civil Pi:ooedu:re l.420(a)(I} gover.ning voluntary dismissc1I by providing that parties may be dropped 'in the manner provided for voluntary dismissal in rule 1.420(a)(l) subject to the e~ceptiqnstateqinthatruie. ,,; $ib911iy;Ali'en, _52So._3ci 779, 780(Fhi.5thDCA:2010). f7. Likewise, because Rule' 1.250(b:) specifies that ·a party is dropped "in the, manner provi•cied' for voluntary dismissal in.Rule. i .420(a)(l), the Siboni court concluded that ''the manner'1 incJud,es the same e.rititieme11tto costs and attorney's fees whjcfr wo.ul.d have bee.n enjoyed had:the dismissal otcurtedentifelyuridetRtilel.420(a)(l). ld.at78L 4 CA/Aro-p~?~Ai~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM 18. Accordingly, the Siboni court held that a “party dropped from litigation under rule 1.250(b) is subject to the time limitation contained in rule 1.525 governing- service of a motion scckingajudgm entforcostsandattorncy’sfees. ” Id, 19; Although Plaintiff filed its Notice, the claims asserted by Plaintiff have been, since the filing ofits initial, complaint, completely without support ofthe facts or the law. At their very core, all ofPlaintifrs claims are based on the presumption that the State Attorney has theauthority to disclose the Requested Materials. Nonetheless; Section 905.17(1), Florida Statutes makes clear thatPlaintifTs RequestedMatcrialscanonlybcreleasedbythcClerkpurs uanltoacourlordcr, The stenographic records, notes, and transcriptions made by the court reporter or stenographer shall be filed with the clerk who shall keep them in a' sealed container hot: subject to public inspection. The notes, records, and transcriptions are confidential and exemptfrom the provisions ofs. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a). Art. I of the State Constitution and shall be released by the clerk only on request by a grand, juiyforusebythegrandjuryor onorderofthecouripursuanftos. 905,27. Scction905.17(1 ),FIoridaStatulcs(2020). 20. The State Attorney has no objection to the Clerk producing and disclosing the Requested Materials should the Court grant an order to that effect, however; it is impossible for the State Attorney to comply with the relief sought by Plaintiff in its remaining claim for declaratory relief as he docs not possess or control the Requested Materials and is statutorily barred fromanydisclosurc. 21. Although the State Attorney was prepared to make his argument, to the Court, Plaintiff decided instead to drop him as a party. Despite Plaintiff’s decision, the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure and the above authorities make clear that because Rule 1.250 specifies that a party is dropped “in the manner provided for voluntary dismissal in Rule 1.420(a)(1),” it therefore '‘operates as an adjudication bn the merits. ” See, Siboni v. Alien, 52 Sb. 3d 779, 781 (Fla. 5th DCA20Kj);Rulel.420(a)(1)FlaiR.Civ.P. 5 CA/ArofftW?k® BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY 18, Accordingly;the Siboiii cour.t held thata "party droppe·d from litigation'underrule l .250(b) is subject to the time limitation contained in rule 1.525 goverrtirtgc service of a n1.otion ~eekingaju,dg111, enJforcqstsarrdattoroey;sfees. " Jd. 19, Although Plaintiff filed its, Notice, the claims asserted by Plaintiff have been; since the filing of its initial, comP,laint, comP,letely without support ofthe facts or the law. At their very core, ~.lLofPlaintiff s !,laims are ba.s~d 9n th~ presulllpJiQQ. thatthe S4it~ Attorney has the·,n1thority io disclose ihe Requested Materials. Nonetheless; ·section. 90'5.17( 1), Florida Statutes rt1akes clear thafPfaintiff's Requ,~steclMateriaiscanonlylJer~leaseclbythe¢ierkpurs t1anttoac9urtor4er, The stenographi_c records, _noJes, ?lld transcdptions n1_i,rde _by t_be court reporter or stenographer shall be: filed with the clerk wh·o shall keep them_ in ~f se·~le-d c_bntainer not: subject to public insj:>ecfroh. The notes, recoJ·ds; (i,id tta,iscriJJtio,is are confidential and exempt from the provisions ofs. 11-9.07(/) ands. 24(a), Art; I of the Stal£~ Constitution andsizall be released,by the derkoiily on request by a grqn{j. jwyforl!Sebythegrand}u_ryor- onorderoftliecourtpursuanitos. • 905:27. -- Section905 J 7( 1),Florida.Statutes(2020). 20; The _State Attorney has no .ql:,j~cti9n to tbt;! Cferk pro<iµcing anci clisclosing the· Requ~sted MaJ~ri<!ls sbould th~ Coµrt gi:ant an orc:kr to thl:lt effect,. how~v~r;. it is impossibl~ for the State Attciiiley to cofuply with the relief sought by Plaintiff in its· remaihirt~ claim fot· ci~-;;la,~tocy r~H~f as he does nqtpos.s~s.s QI: qm_trol th~ Requested Iyfat~ri.;ils l;!nd is·s11:1tutorily barrecl fromanydisclost1_re; 21. Atthough the State Attorney was l?repared to make his argument. to the Court, Pla,int_iff decided inst~ad to;clrop him as ~ party. Despite Pla1ntiff' s _dedsion, the Flor1da Rules of Civil Ptoc_edute and the above authorities n1ake cleat thatbecause Rule 1 :250 specifies thaf a patty· is clropped ''in the manner :proy1cled for voluntary dismissal in Rule 1 A20(a)(l),'' ;it therefore "operates as an adjudication on the ii1erits. ,,, See! Siboniv'. Alle11, 52 So, 3d' 779, 781 (Fla, 5.ih DGA201 0}iRulel. 420(a}(l)Fla.lt. Civ.P: 5 CNAropifEi?~A.i3Rf BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM 22. Consequently, the filing of Plaintiffs Notice triggered Rule? 1,525, Fla. R. Civ. P. andthereforc: Under [§ 57.105], the legislature has expressed its unequivocal, intent that where a party files a meritless claim, suit pr appeal, the party who is wrongfully required to expendfundsforattorneys ’ feesiscnlitledtorccoupthosefecs Martin County Conservation Alliance v. Martin County, 13 So. 3d 856, 857 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (finding that “Courts are not al liberty to disregard the legislative mandate that courts shall impose sanctions in cases without foundation in material fact or law. The word “Shall” in § 57.105, Fla. Stat,, evidences the legislative intent to impose a mandatory penalty to discourage baseless claims, by placing a price tag on losing parlies who engage in these activities. Section' 57.105 expressly states courts “shall” assess attorney’s fees for. bringing, dr failing to dismiss, baseless claims or defenses;”), 23. In fact, “Section 57.105(1) clearly and explicitly confers upon ihe trial court the authority to award attorney's fees to the prevailing party upon the court's initiative; if ‘ the court finds that the losing party . . . knew or should have known that a claim or defense when initially presented to the court dr at any time before trial. . . [w]as not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claim or defense.” Koch y., Koch, 47 So. 3d 320, 324 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). 24. The simple fact of the- matter is that Plaintiff failed to withdraw its Amended Complaint against the State Attorney within the 21 -day period provided for in section 57,105(4), and therefore the State Attorney was permitted to. file his 57.105 Motion for Attorneys’ Fees as sanctions. 2-5 . Furthermore, based on the impossible nature of Plaintiff s demand of the State Attorney, it was proper to demand withdrawal of Plaintiffs remaining claim for declaratory relief 6 CA/AropIl^O^^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY ' 2:2. Consequently, the filing of Plaintiff's Notic_e triggered Rule.' L525, Fla, R. Civ-. P. andtherefore: Under [§ 57,105], the fegislatµre has expressed, its µneq-µiyocaL intent that y.,here a pc1rt Y' (ii~s a, meritfess cl.aim, _:~lliJ pr appe.al, ~be. pa,rty ~h9 is wrongfully re.q4_ired tcr expendfundsforattorneys 'feesisentitledtorecoupthosefees • • • Martin County Conservation Alliance v. ,Martin County, 73 So. Jd 856, 851 (Ffa. 1 stDCA 2011) ( fincl1ngthat "Co11rts are not <!t fibertyto disregard. the legislative. mandate. th_at ~ourts shali_impose. sanctions in cases without foundation in rhateria.Lfac't or Jaw: The. word "shall" in § 5Tl05, 'Fla. _Stat., e.vi<;le.nces the: legislative. intent to impose a manclatory penalty to clisc9wage. '\:,age.less claims, by placing a price tag on losing,:parties, who engage in these 11cti'vitie.s, Sectiorr 57.105 expressly states, courts "shall'' assess attome:(s fees fotbriii$ing, or :failing to disrhiss, baseless claims or defeD_se.s;'')_. 23, In fac.t; "Section 57.105(1}clearly and explicitly confers upon the. trial court the authority-to award attorney's fees to the prevailing party upon the court's initiative, if 'the ,court finds 'thai the. .los1ng p::rrty ... knew or shoujd have. known. .tha.t _ll. c.la.1111 or. dde11se when initially presented fo the court of tit any tiine befoi"e tifol ... [ w]as not supported by the, materia1 facts necessary to establish the claim or defense.'' Koch v:. Koch, 47 ,So. 3d 320, 324 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). 24. The simple fact 6f the' rruitter is that Plaintiff faileo to withdraw its .Amended c(:omplain.t against the 'State Attqrney with.w the 2-f-day period pro:yide4 for in secti9n 5T) 05( 4), .. and th'erefore the .State Atforney was· perrrtitfed to, file his 5T 105 Motion for Attorneys' Fees as sanctions. 25. Furth_ennore., based on the impossibk n,ature of Plaintifrs demand of the State Attorney, itwas properto demand Withdrawal of Plaintiff's remaining claimfot declaratory relief 6 CA/Aropil_,9fflj~~:h_9_¾ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM and serve the 57.105 Motion forAitomeys’ Fees due to Plaintiff’s claimlacking any basis in fact or law. Again, neither the State Attorney nor his office has possession, custody or control of the Requested Materials, Likewise, the State Attorney has; no objection, and never has had any objection, to the Clerk releasing the records sought by Plaintiff, as disclosure of the Requested Materials sought by Plaintiff lies solely within the providence of the Clerk pursuant to an order of theCourt, 26. Consequently, the State Attorney is entitled to recover all of his reasonable attorneys’feesindefendingthissuitbyvirtueof57,l 05,FloridaStatutes, REASONABLENESSANDAMOUNTOFATTORNEYS’FEES 27. From the sendee of the 57.105 Demand to the date of this motion, the attorneys for the State Attorney have rendered 42,2 hours of legal sendees for a total amount of $18,275.00 in defending this action. See time sheets detailing: the amount of hours by each, timekeeper,, the timekeeper’s hourly rate, and a description of the tasks done during those times, on attached. Exhibit “E”. Of that amount, the undersigned.has been paid $0.00 as the engagement with the State Attorney is on a pure contingency fee basis. The undersigned expects to incur ail additional 4.0 hours at $425.00 an hour in preparing for and attending the hearing on attorneys’ fees. Thus, the total amount ofhourly attorneys’ fees the State Attorney is seeking is 46.2 hours for a total of $19,975.00. As further set forth below, the State Attorney also seeks a multiplier of 2.0, which whenappiiedmakesthegrandtotaiattprneys ’fees assanctions soughthcrcin$39,950.00, 28. An Affidavit of Attorneys’ Fees is attached hereto as: Exhibit which details andbreaksdowntheattorneys’feessoughtherein. CA/ArOpte?)-)PJ® BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY I and serve• the 57.105 Motion for_Attorneys' Eees due to Plaintiff's claim lacking any basis in fact: or law. Again, neithetthe State Attorney nor his office has possession,, custody or control of the Reqll:ested MateriaJs. Likewise, the. State Attqmey has ·n9 objectioI.1, ap.d never llas hacl _any objection, to the Clerk releasing the, records sought by Plaintiff; as disclosure of the Reque·stcd Materials souglitby Plaintiff lies solely within the providence of the Clerk pursuant to an order of 26. Consequently; the St.afe Attoh1ey is entitled to recover all of his r·easohable· attorneys'[ eesinclefend1.ngthissuitbyvirhleof~7.i 05 ,FlorfrlaSfatut~s, REASONABLENESSANDAMOUNTOFATTORNEYS.'FEES 27·_ From the service of the 57. 105 Demand to the date of this motion, the attorneys for' the $tateAttowey have rendetecl 42 . .2·1:iour~ofleg~f.serv)ces for a to(ai ampu11t pf$JS,275.0Q .. i11 defending this action. See time sheers detailing: the aniount of hours by each. timekeeper, the timekeeper's hourly rate; and a description of the tasks done during those times, on attached. Exhibit "E". Of that :i.mount, the. unclersignecl.has been paid $0.00 as the engagement with the State Attorney is oil. a pU.te contingency fee basis. The undersigned expects to •incur an additiona1 4.0 hmirs at $425.00 an hour inpr~paringfor ancl attending'the hearing on attorneys' fees. 'Thus, the total amount of hour-ly aft_omeys' fees the Staie Attorney is seeking is 46.2 ch outs for a total. of $19;975.00. As further set forth below, the State Attorney also seeks a multiplier of:2-.0,, which whenapplieqmake_sth~grandtom.iattom~y~ 'fees a.ssan~tious sou.ghtllerein$39,950;QO, 28. An Affidavit of Attorneys' Fe.es is atta:ch·ed hereto a:s: E.tliibit ''F"; which deta:ils andbreaksdowntheattorneys; feessou$htherein. 7 CA/AroPJt~~P~Ai¾ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM 29. The State Attorney would offer the following facts and arguments as they relate to the factors promulgalcdinRiilc 4-1.5 ofthe Rui cs Regulating the Florida Bar and Florida Patient’s CompensgtionFundy.Rowe ,472So.2dl 145 (Fla.1985) : Factor FactsahdArgumcnts (A)thctimcandlabor complexity,anddifficulty ofthequestionsinvorved, andtheskillrequisiteto perfprmthelegalservice properly The time involved by counsel was substantial, consuming nearly 75 hours of legal work. Moreover, the issues in controversy were novel and complex in that Plaintiff sought to create a new private statutory cause ofaction under Florida Statute § 905.27, implicated several 1st Amendment issues, and further sought declaratory relief pursuant to said Statute, Finally, this litigation has been ongpingfor nearly a year and required skill and knowledge in these areasofthelaw. (B)thclikelihoodlhatthe acceptanceofthe particularemployment willprccludcothcr employmcntbythclawycr Because of the amount of time involved in this litigation arid considering the relative small size ofthe firm representing the State Attorney, the undersigned attorneys were: forced to turn away or delay representing other clients especially during critical stages’ of thelitigatiori,duetotimerequiredirithein fstantmatter. (C)thcfee,orratcoflee, customarilychargcdinthc localityforlcgalscrviccs bfacdrilparableofsimilar nature The base fees consisting of $425.00/hour forMr, Wyler’s services and $475.00/hour for Mr, Jacobs’ services are reasonable. for lawyers in their respective communities, possessing equal expcricnccandskill. (DJthcsignincanceof.or subjectmattcrofthc representation,aridthe resultsobtained The outcome of this case is of great public signi ficance to the State ofFlorida as it pertains to the disclosure of graildJUl’y records arid the role of the State Attorney concerning such disclosure. Here, the results obtained were the maximum sought by Defendant Aronbcrg as he was dismissed from the case, albeit not within the time constraints ofthe safe-harbor provision within § 57.105, Fla. Stat. (E)lhetimclimitations imposedbythcclicntpr bytheeircumstancesand, asbetwccnattorncyand client,anyadditionalor spccialtimcdcmandsor requestsoftheattorneyby theclient There were riot anyextraordinary limitations imposed by the client, however, Defendant Aronbcrg expected and received zealous representation, with the desire that the case be dispensed ofquickly andefficiently. (F) thenaturcandlcngth oftheprofessiorial relationshipwiththeclient As general counsel for the FPAA the undersigned counsel has represented Defendant Aronbcrg since the beginning of his tenure as State Attorney in civil matters throughout the State ofFlorida as weHasmatiersbcforctheFloridaLcgislaturc. CA/Arop^e^O^Jg^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY 29, The S_tate Attorney wo_uld offer the following facts and argui:nents a_s they-relatejo the factors prorimlga:ted,in,Rule 4-1.5 of the.Rules Regulating the Florida Bar: andFl01:ida Patient's Co1npensgtionF1tnc!F.i?owe ,472So.2dl 145 (Fi~.1985): ( A )thetimt;:andJal?or required,thenovelty, con1plexity;ancidiffi'culty ofthequestionsinvolved, aridtheskillrequisiteto p~rf9rmthelegalservice properly (B)thelikelihobd'tha:tthe ac:ceptanceofthe p:;trttiµl<1.re.mployJJ1er1t willpreclude·other em.ploymen:tbythelawyet (C)thefee,9rrateoffcc, iµ_stomarifycb.argedintb.e, local i tyforlegalservices ofacortiparableorsimilar nature {D )thes1 gnifi'canceof,or _am~ountinvolvedin, the subjedmaheroftb.e reptesehtatioh,artdthc res11ltsobtained (E)thetimelimita:tiorts imp9~ecibythe9lient9r byth~cjr,eµmsta,nces_and 1 asbetweenattorn:eyand client,_anyadditiohalot spcciaftimedef:nandsor requestsoftheattorneyby thechent .- • • (F) thena:tureandlength oftheprofessiohal rdationshipwiththeclient f actsafid.Ar~ments The time fovolved by coµnsel was ~µbstantial, c:onsllming. nearly 75 hours of legal work, Jyion~over, the issu.es in cq11troversy were novel and complex' in that Plaintiff so.llght to cre_1.1te a n:ew pr:ivate sfamtory cause of action ufiderFforida Statute§ 905.2?,implicated. several 1st Amendment issues, and further sought declaratory relief pwsuant to said Statute, Finafly, thi's litigation has peen ongoing:for nearly a year -~1_1drequ1red skill ::__t11d 'know:iedge 111 these a:reasofthelaw. Because bf the amount bf Jitne involved, in this litigation and con~idering the relative smalL sfae of the firn1 representing the State Att.Qrney, th;e µ11_dt;m11gned. at~orn,eys were: forced to mm 1_1way or delay representing other cli•ents espe:cia1ly duriQg critical stagGs· of thelitigatiort,duetotimerequiredinthein :stahtm.attet. The base fees consisting of$425.0.0/hour for'Mr. Wyicr;s seryices and $475.0Q/hoµr, for Mr:., Ja:cobs-' se.rvices are. r._eason<!Bie. for lawyers, m their respective communities, possessing equal experienteandskill. The oµtcorne ofthis case is ofgreat pµbli~: significa11cetothe,State of Florida: .a:s· it pertains to the disclosure of gr:a:nd jury rec·ords and the role of the State Attorney ,concerning such disdosure. Here, the results obtained were the maxinmin sought by Defendant Aroriberg ,as he was <;iismis~ed from the case; albeit not within th9 tinw CQ_nstraiI1ts o_(ihc ~a(c.:ha,r:bor provi_sion within § 57. i65, Fla,. Stat. There were not any exttaotdinar:y lfrnitatiorts imposed.by the client, howevei:, Def~nciarit Aronberg e.xpe.cted and receivecj. ze.aioµ~ rt:pre.~enqition, with the desire th_1_1t the q1se be_ disp~nsed of quickly andefficiently. As general counsel for the FPAA the undersigned counsel has represented Defendant Aron berg since the begihnihgof his tenure, as State Attorney in civil matters throughout the State of Florida as wel.-lasmatt_ersbeforetheFloridaLegislature .. '. ' --- -- -- ,. - .. 8 CA/Ar~it9ffl5?~h9.i\ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM (G)thccxpcricncc, reputation,diligence,and abilityofthclawyeror iawyersperformingthe serviceandthcskill, expertise,orcfficicncyof efforifeflectcdinthc actual providingofsuch sendees This representation required experience in a field available to few lawyers, which included defending the State Attorney from claims of a media entity and lawyers from multiple states regarding the release of information with a nationwide interest. Accordingly, the' undersigned counsel conducted the representation with skill and efficiency wherein Defendant Aronberg was dismissed from the aciionpriorioanyhcaringonthcmeritsbeforethecourl. (H)whetherthcfecis fixedor contingent,and,if fixedastotheamountor rate,thenwhetherthe cl ient ’ sabilitytppay restcdtoanysign i ftcant degrceohthcoutcomcof therepresentation. The fee arrangement: herein was entirely contingent, wherein obtaining a fee was Conditioned upon prevailing arid obtaining an orderawardingfees. JUSTIFICATIONFORMULTIPLIER 30. Defendant Aronberg was able to proceed with this litigation only if counsel would receive a court order awarding contingency based attorneys’ fees upon achievement ofa successful outcome in this case., See, Exhibit “G”. Given this and the fact that counsel risked a total of 74.8 hours of work for no pay, of which 39,4 hours is subject to the 57.105 Demand,, Defendant, Aronberg submits that multiplier of 2.0 would be appropriate in this case. Based upon the hours expended, the hourly fates and a 2.0 multiplier, Defendant Aronberg respectfully requests ah award ofattorneys’feesassanctionsasstated herein. 31. With regard to the application of a multiplier, the court must analyze the three factorssetforthin StandardGuaranty’InsuranceCo. v. Quanstrom ,55 5So.2d828(F la. 1990): (1) whether the-relevant market requires a contingency fee multiplier to; obtain competent counsel; (2) whether the attorney was able to mitigate, the risk of nonpayment in any way; and (3) whether any of the factors set forth in Rowe are; applicable, especially the amount involved, the results obtained, and the type of fee arrangementbetweentheattorneyandhisclient. See, CitizensPropJns.Corpy,PM ,183So.3dl134(Fla.3dDCA2015). 9 CA/Aropf^O^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY (G)theexpetience, reputatioii,diligence,aftd abilityofthelawyeror iawyer~per(on:i:i-ingthe s.ervi c:eancltheski_il, - expertise_,orefficiencyof eff orite fl ectedi tithe actual providingofsuch ,- services (H),vhetherthef eeis fixedot tontihgent;a:nd,if fixedastotheamountor rate,themvhetherthe c fi~n_t' sa.b i lityt_opay restedtoany_signjficant degreeontheouttoineof· thetepteserttatioh. This repr:esentationrequired experience in: a field available to few lawyers, which included defending the StateAttomey froni dainis. of a media entity and la,vyers from multiple states regarding the re1.ease-Qf ir1fom111tJoffw1th a natiomyi"cie inter¢st, _Accor:d1ngiy, the, µn_dersigileci c:ou11sel conducted the representation with _sidH·_~d efficiency wherein Defendant Arnnbe_rg was dismissed from the, adi ort pri orloanyh eari n gon them eri tsbe forethe_courl. The fee arrangeb1ent herein was ·entirely contingent, wherein obfaining a fee was conditioned upon prevailing and obtaining a:n orderawardingf ees. JUSTIFICA TIONFORMUL TIPLIER 30. Defendant Aronbergwas able to proceed with this.liti$ation only if counsel would receive a court cm!er a.ward1ng contmgency ba.s.ecl ~ltwneys' fees upon achi_e:ye111_ept ofasu,cces_s_Ni outcome in this case .. See"; Exhibit "G". Given this and the fact that counsel risked a total of 74.8 hq-u,rs of work f9r no pay, of which 39,4 hours is s'llbject to th~ 57. i 05 Demanµ, Defendant Aronberg submits tba.1 multiplier of 2'-0 would be ci:ppropriate in this case. Bas_ed upon the hours expended, the hourlytatesand a 2.0 mult~pliet; Defendant Aronbcr~:respcctfully req~ests ah award ofattorneys ;f e,es11s~ancti ons~.;;s.tl! tecl her:ein. 31, With regard to the application of a ntultipliet, the ;c_outt hmst analyze ·the three factorssetforthin StandaFdGiwrantylnsuranceCo. v. Quanstrom ,555So.2d828(F la.1990}: (1) whether the- relevant nJar}<et requires a contingen.cy fee m11Uj'plier- to obtain ' ' compe_tent co_Unsel; (2) whether- the attorney was able to mifigate, the risk of nonpayment in ,any way; and {3) whether any of the factors set forth in Rowe are; applicable, especially the amount involved, the results obtained, and the type 6f fee. arrangementbetw:eeritheattomeyandhisclient. ·- • - See_, CifizensProp,Ins. Corp.y,Pulloqyfnga ,l 83So.3dl l 34(fla:.3dDCA2015). 9 CA/Aropffifu?ih¥A BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM 32. Here, as to the first factor there was no other counsel in the relevant market who would agree to represent Defendant Aronberg under the contingency fee agreement.needed due to the financial situation of the Office of the State Attorney as a public entity funded entirely by the taxpayers of the State of Florida. Although “Risk Mitigation” within the Florida Department of Financial Services and the Office of the Attorney General indeed represent the State Attorney in some instances, this case was not picked up by either and Defendant Aronberg was left needing representation by other, private counsel. Although the undersigned counsel and. his law firm arc General. Counsel for the Florida Prosecuting: Attorneys’ Association, Inc,, (“FPAA”) the instant matter did not fall within the scope of representation for the FPAA and required a separate engagement between Defendant; Aronberg and the undersigned counsel. Accordingly, the undersigned counsel and his law firm agreed to represent Defendant Aronberg on,a contingency fee basis and to try the case to final judgment considering that there was no other counsel willing torepresentDefendantAronbergonsuchterms. 33. With respect to the other factors to be considered in applying a multiplier as set. forth in Quailsfrom, here Defendant Aronberg was unable to mitigate against non-payment of fees because as a purely taxpayer funded entity, the Office of State Attorney had no other means by which to pay the undersigned counsel. Additionally, Defendant Aronberg meets each, of the individual Rowe factors as set forth in the table located above on pages 8-9. Accordingly, based on the foregoing the application of amultiplier herein is proper. In this vein, the Rowe, court set guidelinesforthesizeofamultiplier,asfollows: Based on bur review of the decisions of other jurisdictions and commentaries on the subject, we conclude that in contingent fee cases,; the lodestar figure calculated by the court is entitled to enhancement by an appropriate contingency risk multiplier in the range from. 1.5 to 3. When the trial court determines that success was more likely than not at the Outset, the multiplier' should be 1.5; when the likelihood of success was approximately even at the Outset, the multiplier should 10 CA/Arop^e^O^S^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY 32, Here, as to the first, factor there was n-o other counsel in the relev:ant' market'who would}igtee to represent Defendant Aronbetg-undet the contingency fee agreement heeded due to the fi11,a11cial situatiqn of the Office o(the State Attqrney as a pub liq entity fllr1deci e,ntixely by the taxpayers oftht State of Florida. Although "Risk Mitigation"\vithirt the Florida .Department of Financial Services and the Office of the Attorney General indeed represent the State Attorney in some 1nsta11c:es, this case wa_s not pickt!<:f up by either and Pefendf!ntA1;oql:>t!rg \ya_s left nee,ding tepreseniatio1i. by other, private-counsel. Altho~ugh the undersigned counsel and his. law fim1 are, General Counse,l for the Florida Prosecµtin& Attorneys' Association, inc,, {'-'FPAN?) the instant matter did no.f _fall within the scope_ of represent~tion for the F PM an·ct required .a separate eil~agement betw:een Defendant Afonberg and the undersigned counsel. Accordingly, the un_dersigne,d coµnsel and his I~w 611:nagre,ed-i.o.reP-re,se,ntDefe,rn;lllntAronbe,rg on.a conti'ngern:y foe basis and t.o try'the,cas_e to finaljudgment c.onsidering that there was ho other counsel willing torepresentDefendantAronbergonsuchterms. 33. With respect to the other fac:tors to_ he considered in applyfog ~ muftipiier 1ts set forth in Qua ,1stro1rt, hete Def en:dant Atonbetg was unable to mitigate. against non-payni.eniof foes becallse a!'. a purely taxpayer funded entity,.the Office of State Attorney had no other means by which Jo pay .the un·dersign_ed counsel. Additio_nally, Pefendant AronJ:,erg meds each. of the individual Rowe factors as set fortli in the table located above on pages 8-9. Accordingly, based on i&e foregoµig th~ appliccltion 'Of a p1l1lt1piier ·h~rei_n is proper. li;i this v(!in, the ~o..ve,:<,:ollrt set _guideli'nesforihesizeofamultiplier,asfollows: Based on our review of the· decisfons of: otherjurisdittiohs and .conimentaties on the subject, we conclude that in contingent fee cases,. the lodestar.figure calculated by the- court }s entitled to enhancewent by a,r1- appropriate -cop.flngency risk mult1plier in the_ range from 1.5 to 3. When the trial colirt determines that success was more likely than not at the outset, the multiplier' should be 1.5; when the likelihood 6f success was approximately even at the outset, the multiplier should IO CA/Aropfi:§h9~A~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM be 2; and, when success was unlikely at the, time the case was initiated, the multipliershouldbeinthcrangcof2.5to3. FloridaPatient’sCoinpensationFundv.Rowe ,472So.2dl 145 (Fla. 1985). 34. Additionally, the Quanstrom court confirmed and modified the Rowe approach, as follows: However, we find.that the multiplier in J?owe should be modified as follows:. l£the trial court determines that: success was more likely than not at the outset, it may apply a multiplier of 1 to L5; if the trial court determines that the likelihood of success was approximately even at the outset the trial judge may apply a multiplier of 1.5 to 2.0; arid if the trial court determines that success was unlikely,at the outset of the case, it may apply a.multiplier of 2.0 to 2.5. Accordingly, our Rowe decision ismodifiedtoallowamultiplieffromito2.5. Standard Guaranty Insurance Co. V. Quanstrom, 555 So. 2d 828. 834 (Fla. 1990). ThuSj based upon all ofthe; foregoingfactors, Defendant Aronbergrespectfully submits that amultiplier of2.0 isappropriatcforthisrcprcscntaiion. CERTIFICATIONOFGOODFAHHEFFORTTORESOLVE The undersigned certifies that a good faith.effort was made to resolve the issues raised in this motion by agreement of the parties. The parties were, unable; to resolve by agreement the issucsofcntitlcmchttofccsbrthcamountoffecs. WHEREFORE, Defendant, DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm. Beach County, Florida, prays that this Honorable Court will enter an Order awarding Defendant Aronberg his reasonable attorneys’ fees with a multiplier of 2.0 against the Plaintiff, CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS,LLC,publisherofthcPALMBEACHPOST ,intheamountofS3 9,950.00. CERTIFICATEOFSERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 9th day of November, 2020, a copy of the foregoing Defendant,- Dave Aronbcrg’s Amended Motion for Attorneys’ Fees has been electronically filed withtheFloridaE -FilePortalfbre -servicconallpartiesofrecordhereiri. Il CA/Ar°pteffiQ^1AW BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY be 2; and, whe.n suc_c_ess w;is J1I11ikely ~t the, time the c;J.se was 1ruJfated, the m11ltipliershou1dbeintherangfof2.5to3. FloridaPatient'sCompensationFundv;Rowe ,472So.2di.i45 (Fla.1985). 34. Additio11_atiy, the Qucmstroni col.lrt c_onfinm:d_and mo~ciified the R9we apprni!ch, _<1s follows: However, we find.that the multiplier in.Rowe should be modified as follows:. If the tda:i court qetemunes that: Sll_C~ess was mo.re_ l~_ely tliao, 11ot. _at th.e outset, lt n111y apply a. rnuldplier of 1 to l .~; if the, trial court_ d.etennines that the iikeiihood of success was approximately e:ven at' the outset; the trial judge 'ilia)l apply a multiplier of 1.5 to 2.0; and ifthe trial courl.ddemiirtes that success \Vas unlikely'.afthe outset ofthe case, it may apply a.multiplier of2.0 to 2.5. Accordingly, our Rowe decision ismodified toallowamul tipli erfrom lto2. $. • Sta,1dard·G1itlraitty lilsu1"c111ce Co, v. Qua1ist1:oin, 555 So. 2d 828'; 834 :(Fla. 1990),. Thus; based upon all of the foregoing:factors, Defendant AronbergrespectfuUy submits that,amu1tiplier of2.0 isappr:qpriateforthisrepresenta.tion. CERTIFICATIONOFGOODFAITHEFFORTTORESOLVE The unclersigned certifies that a ggocl faith effort was made to resolve the i?su,es raised in this m.otion by agr:e_eme11t of the parties. The par:ties were. t1na_ble to resolve' by _agreement the issuesofentitlementtofeesortheamountoffees, WHEREFORE, D_ef~nqilqt, DAVE ARON_BERG, as Stqte Attqrriey pf PaJp1 Beach. Co.unfy; Florida, prays thatthis Honorable Court will enter ah Order awarding Defendant Aron berg his .reasonable attorneys' fees with a multiplier of 2.0 against the Plaintiff, CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS,LLC;publisherofthePALMBEACiiPOST ,inthe~unountof$3 9:,_950.00. CERTIFICATEOFSERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 9th day of ,Noy ember, 2020, a ~opy of the foreg9ing Defendant,. Dave Aronberg's, Amended Motion for Attorneys' Fe,es has be:en electronically filed withtheFloridaE -FilePortalfore -s·etviceonaHpartiesofrecordherein .. 11 CA/ArofB_:ffl5?ih1% BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM JACOBSSCHOLZ&WYLER,LLC /s/DouglasA. Wyler Arthur! Jacobs,Esq. Fla.BarNo.: 10249 Fla.BarNo. :0021261 DouglasA.Wyler,Esq. Fla.BarNo.: 119979 961687GatewayBlvd ,Sui te201 -I FcrnandinaBcach,Florida32034. (904)261 -3693 (904)261 -7879Fax Primary:[email protected] Attorrieysforjyefendqny^ CA/Aropf^O^^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY l-2 JA.COJJSSCHOLZ&WYLER;LLC /s/DouglasA. Wyler ArtliurIJacobs,Esq, Fl~,I3~rNR,: 10249 RichardJ. Scholz,Esq. Fla.BatN o. :0021261 Douglas½•. Wyler ;Esq . . Fla.BarNo.: 1 i9979 991 ~8'lGqtewqyBlvd.,$ui te201 ~r Fernandin~each,Fforida32034. (904)261 -3693 (904)261 -7879Fax Prirnary:[email protected] :A ftprneysfo1:Defendgnf.Daye_;lronberg CA/AropffEt?~At¼ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM EXHIBIT “A” i EXHIBIT “A” i I CA/Ar0Pft®BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY EXHIBIT '' A" CA/Arcpfi~~P~Ai~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3(27/2023 4:20:48 PM I Friday, September18, 2020 at 11:09:24 Eastern Daylight Time _ _ —- — Subject: SERVICEOFC OURTDOCUMEN T; CASE NO. 2019-CA-014681;CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC V. DAVE ARONBERGET AL. Date: Monday, June 8, 2020 at 3:58:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: DouglasWyler To’:: '[email protected]', [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] [ Attachments; 2020-06-08Ar onberg57.105DemandandMotionf orA ttorneys' Fees,pdf Pleaseseea ttached and below in this matter. Court: CircuitCourtoftheFift eenthJudicialCir cuit,inandf orP almBeachCoun ty, Florida CaseN o: CaseN O.2020-CA -014681 Plaintiff: CAFIoridaHoldings, LLC Defendant:: Dave Aron berg TitleofDocumen ts Served: • Fla.St at. §57.105 Demand Letter • Defendant, Dave Aronbergis Motion for Attorneys' Fees: Sender's Name and Telephone Number: DouglasWyler (904) 261-3693 Sincerely, Doug Wyler, Esq. Jacobs, Scholz:& Wyler, LLC 961687 Gateway Blvd, STE 201-1 Fernandina Beach, FL 32034 904-261-3693 904-261-7879 (fax) [email protected] Pleasebeadvisedtha tthise-mailandan yfilestr ansmittedwithitar econfidential attorney-client communication or may otherwise be privileged or confidential and are intended solely for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please dp not read, copy or retransmit this communication but destroy, it immediately. Any unauthorized dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. i

Page 1 of 1 CA/Ar°fft® BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Friday, s_epternber-218, 20·20 at 111p9:24 Eastern· DaylighHirne Subject: I SERVICEOFC OURTD_OCUMEN T; CASE. NO~ 2019-CA~014681; CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLCV. DAVEARONBERGET AL. .Date: Monday, Jun!'! 8, 2020 at 3-:58:58 PM Ea'stern Daylight Time From: DouglasWyler I '[email protected]:ini!, [email protected], flser'[email protected], Boyajian·[email protected], 'riveraal@gtlaw:tom, GRYGIELM@gtlawJ::cim • : Attc1chm~nts: 2020-06-QBAr onbergS7,10~P~mar,:dandMotionf orA ttqrneys' Fees,pdf Pleaseseea ttached and below in this matter. Court: Ci rcuitCou rt oft he Fift eenthJudicia I Cir cuit,inandf orP almBeachCoun Florida CaseN 6: Cas_eN d.2Q20cCA -b1468i Plaintiff: CAFlorid.aHoldings, LLC Defen:dant: Dave Aronberg : TitleofDo;cumen ts • Fla.St at. § 57-.105 Demand letter Served: • Defendant, Dave Aronberg'.s Motion for Attorneys' Fees: Sender's· Name and DouglasW yler Telephone Number: (904)261-3693 Sincerely, Doug Wyler, Esq. Jacobs, Scholz·& Wyler, LLC 961687 Gateway Blvd., STE 201-1 Fem13r,dinc3 Beach, FL 32034 9Q4-l61°3§93 _904-29_1 ~7~P9 (fax) [email protected] ty; Pleasebec1dvisedtha tthise-mailandan Yfilesfr aosmittedwithitar ec onfidential ;;ittorney-dient c_qmm_LJf"!]cc3tiqn or mc1y otherwist? be, privileged qr con@~nti~_I a11.d i:lfe i_n):~_ncied solely fon:he· irtclividuc!I or. entity to:whcim they are: cidclressecl. If you are n·otthe intende,d recipient, pl_ec1se dq not read, copy or retransmit this cornmunication but destroy. it ir:nmegiately: Anyµnauthorized d]ssefnjnatidn, clistribution or copyJng_ of thfs communication is strictlyproh]bited. •

Page 1 of 1 CA/Arop}liffn?iA~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. ~/27/2023 4:20:48 PM THE LAW OFFICES OF JACOBS & ASSOCIATES. P-A. ARTHUR I. JACOBS Jacobs Scholz & Wyler, llc. A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY OF PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ‘ ATTORNEYS AT LAW GATEWAY TO.AMELIA 961687 GATEWAY BLVD., SUITE 2014 Fernandina Beach, Florida32034 TELEPHONE (904); 261-3693 FAX NO. (904) 261-7879 RICHARD.J. SCHOLZ, P.A. RICHARD J; SCHOLZ DOUGLAS A. ,WYLER.,P.A. DOUGLAS A. WYLER June 8? 2020 VIA ELECTRONIC & U.S. MAIL Stephen A. Mendelsohn, Esq. Greenburg Traurig, P.A. 5100 Town Center Circle, Suite 400 Boca Raton, FL 33486 RE: CA Florida Holdings, LLC v. Dave Aronberg et al. Palm Beach County, Case No.: 2019-CA-014681 Dear Mr. Mendelsohn: As you are aware our firm represents the interests of Dave Aronberg, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County. Florida, in the above referenced matter. The purpose of this letter is to demand the voluntary dismissal of your First Amended Complaint, (the “Complaint”), dated January 17,2020. This1 demand is made pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes. As you know, Section 57.105 provides: (1.) Uppn the court’s initiative or motion of any party, the court shall, award a reasonable attorney’s fee, including prejudgment interest, to be paid to the prevailing party in equal amounts by the losing party and the losing party’s attorney on any claim or defense at any time during a civil proceeding of action in which the court finds that the losing party or the losing party's attorney knew or should have known that a claim or defense when initially presented to the court or at any time before trial: a. Was not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claim or defense; or b. Would hot be supported by the application of then-existing law to those material facts. Today, Judge Marx granted, with prejudice.. Defendant Aronbergps Motion to Dismiss Count II of the Plaintiff’s Complaint; Pursuant to the Court’s ruling, the Plaintiffs only remaining cause of action consists of Count I, for Declaratory Relief. Accordingly,, we believe that the Complaint filed herein and its sole remaining Count for Declaratory' Relief is not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claims asserted, and that your c laims are not supported by the application of current law to said material facts; CA/Arop^e^O^I^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY JACOBS SC.HOLZ ~ W'Y,LEE, LI,..C. A LIMITED l.lABILITY COMPANY'OF PROFESSIONALASSOCIATIO~S 'ATTORNEYS AT LAW GATEWAY TO.AMELIA THE LAcW:OFFICES OF JACOBS & ASSOCIATES. P.A. ARTHUR I. JACOBS 961687 GATEWAY BLVD., SUITE 201:1 FER..'-A.."IDINA BEACH, FLORIDA 32034 June 8, 2020 VIA ELECTRONIC & U.S. MAIL Stephen A. Mendelsohn, Esq. Greenburg Traurig,P.A. 5100 ToWn Center Circle, Suite 40() Boca Raton, FL 33486 J"ELEPHONE (904): 261-3693 FAX NO. <.904) 261,-7879 'RE: CA:Florida Hofrlings, LLC v. Dave Aron berg et al. Paim Beach County; Case N?.: 20t9~CA-014681 Dear Mr: Mendelsohn: RICHARD.J. SCHOLZ_. P.A. RICHARD J: SCHOLZ D0UGL'AS A .. WYLE.R,,P.A. o_OUGLA.s A. W.YLE.R As you are. aware ot1r firm represents the .interests of Dave Aron berg, as.State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida, 'in die above referenced rnatter. The pul'.])O:Se ofthis letter is to dem·and the voluntary 4ismissal of your Ffrst Amended Complaint, (the "Complaint"), dated January 17, 2020. This' demand 1s made pursuant to section 57'. f 05, Fiorida _Statutes, • As you know; Section 57.105 provides: (1.) Upon the court's ,initiative or motion of any party, the court shall. award a reasonable attorney's fee, including prejudgment interest, to be paid to the prevailing party-in equal amounts by the· losirig party and the losing party's attorney on any ·cla.im or d~fense at any ti_me. during a civ:H prnct!eding or action in which t_he <;ourt finds th~t the fosing pa~y or th~ losing party"s atton:rey knew or s_hould have known that a claim or defense when initially presented to the court or at any time before trial: a. Was not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claim or defense; or b. Would not be supported by the application of then-exist,ing law to those material facts. • Today, Judge'Map;, gr:anted, with prejudice,.Defend~ntAronberg';s Motion tq Dismiss Count Hof the Plaintiffs Complai_nt Pursuant to the Court's·ruling, the Plaintiffs oniy re'maining caw;;e ofactic;m consists of Count I, for Declaratory Relief. Accordingly, we believe that th~ Complaint filed he.rein • arid .. its, soie remaining Count for beclaiiiof); Rel fol fa not supportedhy the mkterfarfacts nece·ssary .fo · establish the claims asserted, and that your claims. are not supported by the abplication of current law to said material facts,· • • CA/Arcpfl8ffi5?~hl4Ri BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I First, and foremost, the Complaint is not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claims asserted because neither Defendant Aronberg, nor The Office of the State Attorney for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit is in custody or control of the 2006 grand jury materials sought therein. Simply put, the declaratory relief sought by the Plaintiff, seeks records from my client that are impossible for him or his office to produce. Accordingly, Defendant Aronberg is not a proper party to this action because no matter what, he and his office do not have possession, custody, or control of the requested materials. In addition to the foregoing material facts that negate the claims asserted in the Complaint, your claims are also not supported by the application ofcurrent law. Specifical ly, your action for declaratory relief fails based on the,clear, unambiguous statutory language found in Section 905.27(2), Florida Statutes, which states: When such disclosure is ordered by a court pursuant to subsection (1) for use in a civi 1 case, it may be disclosed to all. parties to the case and to their attorneys and by the latter to their legal associates-and employees. However, .//re grand jury testimony, afforded such persons by he courtcan only be used in the defense or prosecution ofthe civil or criminal case and for no other purpose whatsoever. Moreover, even ifthe Plaintiff were to prevail in the declaratory action, Mr. Aronberg would be unable to comply with any court order granting disclosure of the requested documents because neither Mr. Aronberg nor The Office of the State Attorney for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit have possession, custody, or control of the 2006 Epstein grand jury records. Based on the foregoing, if the Complaint is not dismissed within 21 days of the service of this letter, the enclosed Motion for Attorney’s Fees will be filed and we will seek as sanctions, from your client and your firm, recovery of the legal expenses incurred in defending this frivolous action. Please.govem yourself accordingly' Douglas A, Wyler, Esq. For the Firm Encl.: Defendant’s Motion for Attorneys’ .Fees CA/AroPte®QW BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3 27 2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Fir~t: and foremost, the Co'?plaint is n?taSupported b/ the material facts n 1ecessary to .estahli"sh the claims asserted because neither Defendant Aronberg, nor The Office of tHe State Attorney for the fifteenth Judicial C:ircuit is in custody or control of the 2006 grand jury inaterials sought therein. Simply put; the declaratory relief sought by the Plaintiff; seeks records !from my· client that are impossible for hitn or his office.to produce. Accordingly, Defendant Aronbeht is not a proper party to this action because no matter ·what, he and his· office do ,not haye .Possession, ¢usfody, or control of the requestecl materials. 1 • lh adci.ition t,o the foregoj11g 111a.terial facts th?t neg~te the cla,.in,s ~serted (ri th~ Compl?,int; your cl!!ims are also not supporte<i by the application ofcurrent hw .. Specifical!y, your action for deciaratory relief fails based on the.clear, unambiguous .statutory language found in Sectiori 905.27(2), Florida Statutes, which states: • - •• When such disclosure is ordered by a court pursuant to subsection ( 1) for use in a civil case, it nJay be disclosed to all parties to the.case and to their attorneys and by the latter to their legal associates-and employees. However, .the grand furv testimonv afforded ~uch persons by the court: cano~lv be used in the defe~se or prosecution oft he civil or criminal case and for no other purpose whatsoever. • Moreover, even if the Plaintiff were to prevail in the declaratory action~ Mr. Aron berg woUlo be unable to coinply \vith :any court order granting disclosure of the -requested docum¢nts because neither Mr. Aronberg nor The .Office of the State Attorney for the Fifteenth Judicial' Circuit have possession, custody, or control ofihe 2006' Epstein grand jury records. Bllsed on the foregoing, if the Complaint is not disrnisseci \vithiA 21 days of the service of this letter, the end9sed M9tion for Aftoi-ney's Fees will be:filed and we will seek ·as sa'nctions, from your ciient and your firm, recovery of the legal expenses incU1Ted 1i1defendingthis frivolous action. Pleas~~acc~ Douglas A, Wyler; Esq. For the F 1rm • Encl.: Defendant's Motion.for Attorneys' .Fees CA/Aropifm5?~A.9:..¾ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3:/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIF TEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC, Publisher of the PALM BEACH POST, Plaintiff, v. CASENO.: 19-CA-O14681 DAVE ARONBERG, as: State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida: SHARON R. BOCK, as Clerk and Comptroller of Palm Beach County, Florida. Defendants. _/ / DEFENDANT, DAVE ARONBERG’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES Defendant, DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida, by and through the undersigned attorneys, moves the Court, pursuant to Florida Statutes, Section 57.105. to award him reasonable attorneys’ fees for the defense of Plaintiff s First Amended Complaint, (the “Complaint”), and as grounds therefor, would show that on June .8,2020, Plaintiff was served a copy of this Motion, together with a letter from the undersigned attorney, in accordance with subsection (4) of the above Statute, demanding dismissal ofthe Complaint, at least 21 days-prior to the filing ofthis Motion. In said letter, Defendant’s attorney advised Plaintiffofthe facts which establish that the Complaint is without support of the facts or the law. WHEREFORE, Defendant, DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm: Beach. County, Florida, respectfully requests the Court enter an Order requiring Plaintiff and Plaintiff s attorneys to. pay said Defendant’s attorneys’ fees incurred herein after service of this Motion. I I CA/Aropf^O^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE.FIFTEENTH JUDICIJ\IL.CIRCUIT • IN AND FOR PALM I3EACH COUNTY, FLORIDA . CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC; Publisher of the PAI.M BEACftPOST, Plaintiff, V. DAVE ARONBJ;:RG, as: St~te Attornei of Palm Beach Courtty, Floriqa; SHARON R. BO.CK, as Clerk and ¢ornpt'roller of Palm Beach Couritv. Flori<fa .. . . -· ., , :, . ~ Defendants. CAS$ NO.: l9-CA-01468i DEFENDANT, DAVE ARONBERG'SMOTION FORATTORN'EYS' FEES Defendant, DA VE ARONBERG, as St~te Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida, by and ' - through the undersigned attorneys, moves the Court, pursuant to Florida Statutes,. Section 57.105, to awarcfhim reasonable .attorneys' fees for .th·e defens~. of Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint, . (the "Complaint"), and as grounds therefor, would show that on June 8, 2020, Plaintiffwas served a copy of this Motion, together with a letter from the w1dersigned attorney, ·in accordance with subsection (4) of the above, Statute, demanding dismissal of the Complaipt; at least21 days-prior to the filing ofthis·Motion. In.said letter, Defendant's,attorney advised Plilifltiffofthe facJs Which • establish that the Complaint is without support of the :facts o'r the law. • WHEREFORE, Defendant, DA VE ARON BERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach. County, Florida, respectfully requests the Court enter an Order requiring Plaintiff and Plai~tiffs attorney::; to pay sa1d Defendant's ~_ttornt;ys' fees inctitrt:d herein after sef\"ice of this .Moticm. CA/Ar0f?tl8ffl5?~A.i¾ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this day , 2020, the foregoing was electronically filed via the Florida E-File Portal for electronic service on the parties of record, herein. JACOBS SCHOLZ & WYLER, LLC is/Douglas A. Wyler Arthur I. Jacobs. Esquire Fla: Bar No.: 108249 Richard J. Scholz. Esquire Fla. Bar No.: 0021261 Douglas A. Wyler, Esquire Fla. Bar No.: 119979, 961687 Gateway Blvd., Suite 201-1 Fernandina Beach, Florida 32034 (904)261-3693 (904)261-7879 jacobsscholzlaw@cotncast:net Attorneysfor Defendant CA/Ar°Phe®BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. ^727/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I ·he:reby certify that op th_i_s • __ day ___ , 2020, the foregoing was electronicafiy filed via' the Florida E--File Portal for ele.cti:onic service' on the parties o( record!berein. I JACOBS'SCHOLz'.&-WYLER, LLC ls-I Do.ugla!, A. Wj,fer Arthur I. Jacobs, Esquire Fl~: Bar No.: 108249 Richard J. Secholz, l;$qu1re Fla. SarNo::. 0021261 Douglas A. Wyler, Esquire Fla. BatNo,: 119979, 96168,7- Gatev.-·ay Blvd.,Suite 201-I Fernandina Beach, Fiorida32034 (904)261-3693 (904}261~7879 jacobsscholzlaw@coincastnet Attor.neysfor Defendant CA/Aro~ffffD?i~¥-M BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. ~/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I EXHIBIT “B” I I EXHIBIT “B” CA/Arop^O^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY EXHIBIT ''B" EXHIBIT "B'' . . -· CNAropifEtP~Ai~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3[n7/2023 4:20:48 PM ! GT GreenbergTraurig Stephen A. Mendelsohn Tel 561.955.7629 Fax 561.659.9119 [email protected] June 23, 2020 Douglas A. Wyler Jacob Scholz & Wyler, LLC 961687 Gateway Blvd: Suite 201-1 Fernandina Beach, Fl. 32034 Re: CA Florida Holdings, LLC v. Dave Aronberget al. Case No 2019-CA-014681 Dear Mr. Wyler: Weare in receipt ofyour letter of June 8, 2020 with your proposed Fla. Stat, section 57.105 motion. In your letter and your proposed motion, you assert that CA Florida Holdings, LLC and the law firm of Greenberg Traurig, PA should be liable for the attorneys’ fees to be incurred, by State Attorney Aronberg after the date, of your letter. Your letter cites to Fla, Stat, sections 57.105(1) (a) and (b) for support. As shown below, there is no basis for a Fla. Stat, section 57.105 motion, and we:expect;that.if the State Attorney were to make such a motion, the court should deny it. Your letter omits a citation to section 57.105(3). Subsection 57,10513Ya) provides that sanctions may not be awarded where there, is a “good faith argument for the extension, modification or reversal of existing law or theestablishmentof new law, as it is applied to the material facts, with a reasonable expectation of success.” We have such a good faith argument: Contrary to your analysis of Fla. Stat- section 905.27, there are actually three; instances where a court may order the release of grand jury materials. As we argue, the court may order release “in furtherance ofjustice.” There are few cases in Florida reviewing this provision arid its scope. It is an open arid valid question as to whether the court may order release of grand jury transcripts to the media, under both the statute and the First Amendment to the US Constitution in furtherance; ofjustice. Thestatutory language you cite refers to instances where a person is seeking grand jury materials for use in a civil or in a criminal case. In these limited situations; the statute allows for such uses arid, for no other reason. However, the statute does riot state, as you assert, that where the media seeks grand jury materials based upon, its; constitutional standing, which the Circuit Court acknowledged at the June 2, 2020 hearing includes ThePalm Beach Post, that the statutory Greenberg Traurigj PA. | Attorneys at Law 5100 Town Center Circle- | Suite 400 | Boca Raton, Florida.33486 | T-fl'561.965.7000 j F +1 561.338.7099 Albany. Amsterdam. Athnta.-Austin.-BerliiLBoca Raton. Boston/Chicago. Dallas, Delaware. Denver. Foil Lauderdale.,HbustcnLLas-V^as. London? Los Angeles. Mexico City? Miami. Milan" MimieapoihL.Nashville; New Jersey; New YorUlNortheTn Virginia.- Orange County. Orlando..Philadelphia;,Phoenix.- Sacramento.- San Francisco. SepuuShanghai. SiliconValley,Tallahassee. Tampa;Tel AnypTpkyo; Warsaw. Washington, D.C. West.Palm Beach; Westchester County. | www.gtlaw.com CA/Arop^O^®^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. ^/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Ii GreenbergTraurig ,Stephen A. Mendelsohn Tel 561.955.7629 f'ax 5Gi.659.9.li9 ·mendelsohns(Qlgtlaw.coni Douglas A. Wyler Jac:9b Sc;;holz.~ Wyl_er, LLC 9Q 1 (5_87 Gateway Bly cf Suite,2Qla.l Fernandina Beach; FL 32034 Re: CA Florida Holdings, LLC v. Dave Aronberg et aL Case No .. 20'19-CA-01468:l We c1re in receiptofyou.detter ofJune 8, 2020 with your proposed Flc1. Stat ~ection Sf 105 motion, ln your letter c1nd you.r proposedmotiQt\'YOll c1ssert that-CA Florida I:Ioldfngs, LLC and.the law firm of Greenberg Traurig, JJ.A sho.µld be liable for U1e attomeys' fees. to be in_c_t1i:red by State Ari:orn·ey Aronberg ·after the, date of your letter. Your letter cites to Fla. Stat sections 57.105(1) (a} and (b)for support. As.shown.below; there is ho basisfot.a Fla. Stat. section 57.105 motion, and we-expectthatifthe State Attorney were to make such a motion, the court should deny it. Your letter ornit_s ac ci,t;ihon to seQttOD 57JQ~0} St1bse~t1<m 57, l.0$(3)(a) proy1cJes tlrnt s;tn~t1ons may J10t be awarded wher:e there. is. a "good faith argument for the extensio_n, modification or- .reversal of existing lawonhe:establishment of'new law, a·s_it is applied to the material facts, with a reasonable expectation ofsuccess.'1 We.have such a good faith argument: Contrary· to your anafysis of Fia. Stat. section 905.2], there are actually three Instances where a . . court may order the release ofgrand jury materials. As we argue, tbe court; may order releas_e "in. furtherance •of]Usti'ce." There are few cases in Florida,reviewing this provision and its scope. It is ail open and valid. question as· to whether the court. may order tel ease of,grarid jury tfanscri pts 'to the media, tmder both the s.tatute and th~ F1r~t Amendment t9 the US Con5.tttut1on in further~nce; of justi'ceC Th~, statutory langµage you cit~ refers to insta,n~~s wh_ere a person is s~e.king grand jury materials for use in a Civil or :in a c11111inaf case. 111 these Jimited s1tuationsi the statute,3:Uows for such uses an·d. for no other reason. However, the statute· does hot state, as you assert; that where the media seeks grand juty materials based upon.its: corfstitutional standing, which the Circuit Court acknowledged at the June 2, 2020 hearin,g includes The Palm Beach Post, thatthe statutory Gre:eri~rg 1'..t'.aurigi P.A. I Attorneys at L.·n\'. 51 oo T ciwh Center Circie i Suite 4bb i Boca Raton, Fiorida. 33486 1, T +1 '561.955.7600 i F +.1 56l338. 7099 Albany. Amsterdam. Atlanta .. Austin.-Berliii:,Boca.Raton. Boston. ·chica~o. Dallas .. Delaware. Denrnr.:FortLauderdale .. lfousto:1.:Las·Vegas. London'. Los Angeles. Me.iico clty~1'liaiili. l\'lilan: l\fir~neapolis .. "1:;shville. New Jersey/New York.·:Northerfi Vifginia.-Orailge C)ounty. Ol'landci .. Philadeiphia,:Phqenl.x, Sacn,m'ento, San.l'rancisco. ·seou(Sh:mghai. S\liro1i_:\falley. Tallahassee. :rampa, Tel AYiy '..ToJ...·_vo: Warsaw~\1/ashington, 15.C. \¼est_Palrn Be)ch, \V~stchester County. ;,~,:i.~ >!-~ ·\; .. ~'!W"g ir .. 1...,,.J~cm:!!tJ;.;-;·i~~~~'t-~:e-Ji1'.,:e:{'!t;a' ~,:,-~C~r~,; :_rz~ ~-,.-:~;~l.i:"<"i!~'il i~1~ UI"'~~- .. -~~·::t:::l:il :;:::.~~~? ?~t?f,~t?~r;~c:~.' •,;. ~tl :i~~ r~~;,:i:-~-c- :i-r,_,:,,--..":,f~ ::~~1.,~·r-e,-e;.le?cr,, -,~t~ i;~~~q.:-!. www:gtlaw.com CA/Ar0f3fl:§h~9']\_~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. ~/27/2023 4:20:48 PM Correspondence to Douglas A. Wyler June 23,2020 Page 2 use limitation you cite applies. No. reported Florida case has addressed this issue and there is a good faith basi s for. our view ofFla, Stat, section 905.27 i Your letter also argues that'sanctions are applicable because the State Attorney has alleged that it does not possess the Jeffrey Epstein grand jury transcripts. This allegation is also contained in the State Attorney’s Answer. Assuming that the State Attorney does not. currently have physical possession ofthe Epstein grand jury materials, which has yet to-be demonstrated, this does not end the matter. The State Attorney was named as a party not simply as a custodian of grand jury' records. The State Attorney was named in his official capacity as his office has “as its primary interest the protection of its grandjury system.” [Italics in original. ] In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 832 E 3d 554, 559 (11* Circuit 1987). In that, case, the US petitioned a state judge to order the State Attorney to turn overigrand jury transcripts. The State Attorney argued against their release citing to Fla, Stat section 905.27, Later, a federal grand jury subpoenaed the Broward County State Attorney for delivery of state grand jury testimony The Broward State Attorney advised the federal court that- it would produce the transcripts, thereby demonstrating,that while, it- may not have physical possession of the materials, he had legal authority to obtain and deliver them. It should also be noted that the State Attorney moved to quash the subpoena arguing that it was unlawful under Florida law and Fla. Stat, section 9.05.27. This case indicates that where one seeks grand jury materials, the relevant State Attorney is a necessary party in order to protect the grand jury that the Office of State Attorney supervised and to make arguments, ifneed be, against release ofthe grandjury materials. These are some ofthe same reasons why the State Attorney was named in this case. Also, assuming the State Attorney does not have physical possession of the grand jury materials, there is nothing in Florida law that prohibits the State Attorney from, requesting that the Clerk provide copies to the State:Attorney. Chapter 905, Fla. Stats, does not contain a prohibition against a State Attorney demand that the Clerk grant his office access to grand jury materials, even after a criminal case has concluded. Upon information.and belief, the Clerk’s office maintains a log that tracks: release of grand jury materials to the State Attorney upon its request. Please confirm whether the State Attorney has accessed grand jury materials from the Clerk’s office in other instances or that it .has never done so. If the Clerk: has such a log, then its contents should be discoverable, or subj ect to Florida Public records laws.. Greenberg Trau.rig, P.A. | Attorneys at Law | vww:gtlaw.com CA/Arop^O^j BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Correspondence to Douglas A. Wyler Jµne -2\ 2020 Page·~ - - I - use limitation you cite applies. No reported .Florida case has addressed this issue and there is a goo~ faith ha.sis for. our view of'Ffa, St.at. section 9.05.27 I ! Your lefter al!>o argues tliaf sanctions are a:p,plicable because-the Sfafe Att01;11ey: ha:s alleged thatir does not possess the J efftey Epstein: grand jufy transcripts. This allegation is also contained in the State Attorney's Answer. Assuming thattlie State Attorney does not currently· have physical possession ofthe Epstein grand jury materials, which has yet to'.be demonstrated, this does not end the rnatter:. 1'be St.ate Attorney w,Js nanwd .as a party not sjmply as a c4stodian of grand jmy records. Tfre State Attorney was named-fn his· offi_cia:L cap·acity a:s his office has "_as its primary interest the protection of its grandjury system." [Italics in origina.lJ "fure Grand Jury Proceedimrs, 8:3.2 F. 3d 55.4, 559 (llt!_i Circuit 1987). Irt that case, the US petitioned a s~ate judge -to order the State Attorney to turn over:grandjliry transcripts .. The State Attorney argued against their.release dting to Fl~, _Stat section 90527., La_ter, <! fe41:mil gran~ jury $t1l:moenaed the-Broward County State Attorney for delivery of state grand }ury testimony. The Broward State. Attorney advised the federal c01.1rt that- it woµld pr:od_µce the transcript$, thereby demonstrating.that ·while_ it m;ay not have physical possession of.the materials, he ha:dJegal authority to obtain and delivenhein. It should also be noted that the State Attorney· moved to quash the subpoena arguing that it was unlawfyi unger Florida. la.w 11nd Fla. Stat section 9.0.5.21. 'This ~ase ingfo11t~s that:where one seeks gra_nd j11.r:y m_a.ter:i al s, ib e relevant :State A_tt_omey is a necessary party 1 n .order to protect.tbe . .gra1_1d Jury thatthe,Offfce of State Attorney supervised and to ma:ke argu_ments, if need be, against release of the grand jury materials. These ate some off he same reasons why the:State Attorney wa:s,named in this :case: '"' AI~o, as!>u.iplng thg Sti:tte A_ttomey does n_qt ha.ve phys1c:;d pos.sessi911 9fthe gra.1_1dju_ry material.s, there_ is nothing in Flo_rida la.w that prohibits the State Attpi:ney from_ requesting tba.t the Clerk provide copies to the State Attorney. Chapter 905,, Fla. Stats. does not c·onta:i'n a prohibition.against a: State Attorney .demand thatthe Clerk grant hi•s office access to. grandjury Jnatetial"s,>even after a criminal case .has concluded. Upon information. and ·beiief, the Clerk:' s office maintains a iogthat tracks release of gnmg jury materials to .the S{ate Attorney µpon its request. Plea.se c;onfirm whether the State Attorney has _ac_cessed grand jµry materials from the, :(~Jerk' s offke 111 pther 'instances, or that it .has ne,;,er _done so: If the. ·Clerk has such a log, then its contents should be. discoverable, or subject to Florida:- Public:tecords lav/s.. ' Greenberg Traurig, P _t\, I Attorneys at Law www:gtiaw.com I CNArop~~t>,}\~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. j/27/2023 4:20:48 PM Correspondence to Douglas A. Wyler June 23, 2020 Page 3 For these reasons, we decline your Fla. Stat, section 57 105 demand that the case be dismissed against the Office of the State Attorney. We expect that your demand will be withdrawn. Thank yOu, Very, truly yours, /s/Sfephen Mendelsohn Stephen Mendelsohn SAM-js ACTIVE 51081659V1 GreenbergTraurig, P.A. | Attorneys at Law wvwgtlawxorn CA/Aropfi®Q?M BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY -. Correspondence to Douglas A Wyler J-µne -2'.\ 2020 PageJ I For these reasons., we decline your Fla_. Stat. sec,:tion 57. fOS demiind that the case be dismis.sed 11gainst the, Office· of the State Attorney. We e)(pectti}at your 4tmand will' b'.e withdrawr1- Thank you, Very tn.ily yo_urs, /s/Stephe11 Mendelsohn Stephen Mendelsohn $AM.::ls. As;JTIVE 51081699v1 Greenberg Traurig, P _t\., I Attorneys at law W'v'iw:gtlaw.com CA/Aro~ifffl5?iA1-¾ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. j/27/2023 4:20:48 PM . I EXHIBIT “C” I EXHIBIT “C” BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. ^/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY EXHIBIT ''C'' EXHIBIT ''C'' CNArop~?iJ\~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. ~/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I INTHECIRCUITCOURTOFTHEFIFTEENTHJUDIGIALCIReUIT INANDFORPA LMBEACHGOUNTY,FLORIDA CAFLORIDAHOLDINGSXLC, PublishcrofthePALMBEACHPOST, ■ Plaintiff, v. CASE NO.: 19-CA-0.14681 DAVEARONBERG.asStalcAttorneyof PalraBcachCounty,Florida:SHARONR. BOCK,asClerkandComptrollerofPalm Defendants'._J DEFENDANT,DAVEaRONBERG’SMOTIONFORATTORNEYSTEES Defendant, DAVE ARQNBERG, as State Attorney ofPalm Beach County, Florida, by and through the undersigned.attorneys, moves the Court, pursuant to Florida Statutes, Section 57.105, to award him reasonable attorneys’ fees for the defense of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, (the “Complaint”), and as grounds therefor, would show that on June 8, 2020. Plaintiff was served a copy of this Motion, together with a letter front the undersigned attorney, in accordance with subsection (4) of the aboye Statute, demanding dismissal of the Complaint, at least 21 days.prior to the filing'of this Motion. In said letter, Defendant’s attorney advised Plaintiff of the facts'which. establishthattheComplaintiswithoutsupportofthefactsorthelaw. WHEREFORE, Defendant, DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida, respectfully requests the Court enter an Order requiring Plaintiff and Plaintiffs I attorneystopaysaidDefendant’sattorneys’feesincurredhereinafterserviceofthisMotion. CA/Arop^O^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3^/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY - i J:NTI:IECIE.CUITC0URTQFFIIEfIFTEENTHJUDl_ClALCIR<I:UIT INA.NDFQRPA LMBEACHCOUNTY;FLORIDA CAFLORIDAHOtDINGS,LLC, PublisherofthePALiviBEACHPOST, Plaintiff, DA VEAR0NBERG,as$tateAttorneyof Pc!lmBeachCqµnty;,Fioridi:i.;SHARONR. BOCK,a:sCle:rkandComptro lleto £Palm BeachC01.infy,Floricia .. Defendants·. CASEJ-.r.0.: 19-CA-0.14681 j DEFENDANT,DAVEARONBERG'SMOTiONFORA TIOR.t~YS'FEES Defendant, DA VE ARONBERG,-as State Attorney o'f Palin Bea.ch Gounty1 Fforida1 by and through the undersigned atforneys, moves the Court, pursuant to Florida Statutes, Section 57 .105, to award.him reasonable attorneys' fees for the qefen~e of Plaintiff's First Amended, Complaint, (the "Co111pl;iillf'.), and as grounds therefor, would silmy that,onJ11ne 8, 2020; .Plalntiffw;is served a copy afthis Motion, together with .a letter from the· undersigned attorney, irt accordance with subsec;tipn (4) qf the aboye St?tute, cle111aqd11J.g dism1ssaJ ,ofth_e C991plaio.t; a.t ka.~t 2J d,ays. prior tothe, filing-of this Motion_. Io sa:id letter,: Defendant's attorney advised Pla:i_htiff of the fads'which. establishthattheComplaintiswithoutsupportofthefactsorthelaw. WHEREFORE, Defendant, .QA VE ARONB_ERG, as State Attorney of Paim Beach Co.urtty, Florida, :respectfully :requests. the Court enter art Ordertequititig Plaintiff-and Plaintiffs attorneystopaysaidbt!fendant'sattorn~ys'feesinqmedhereinafterservi'ceofih.isMotion. CA/Aro~fL~?i~l_4AA BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. ~/27/2023 4:20:48 PM CERTIF1CATEOFSERV1CE I hereby certify that oh this 1st day July. 2020, the foregoing was electronically filed via theFloridaE-FilePortalforelectronicserviceonthepartiesofrecordherein. JACOBSSCHOLZ&WYLER,LLC /s/ DouglasA.Wyler Arthur I. Jacobs, Esquire Fla. Bar No.:108249 Richard J. Scholz, Esquire Fla. Bar No.: 0021261 Douglas A. Wyler, Esquire Fla-; Bar No. : 119979 ; 961687 Gateway Blvd.1, Suite 201-1 Fernandina Beach, Florida 32034 (904)261-3693 (904)261-7879 [email protected] AttorneysforDefendant,DaveAronberg CA/Arop^O^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY CERTIFICATEOFSERVICE I hereby certify that oii this 1st day July, 2020, tlie :foregoin~ was electrortically filed via theFlqrida;E-fi_lePort;alforelectron_ic:seryl9~or1theparties.ofr~cor,@.erein. JACOBSSCHOLZ&WYLER,LLC /s/Dqugl qs.j, Wyl<';r Arthur I. Jacobs, Esquire Fla.Har.No.: 108249 .Richard l Scholz; -Esquire Fl<!, B~r 'No_,; 002 l'.291 .Pougi?s .A.., Wykr, EsqllcJJ\;! Fla-, .Bar Ne..: 119979 : 961687 Gateway Blvd_;, Suite 201~1 Fernandina Beach, Florida 32034 (904) 26'1-369:3 (904) )61-7879 j ac_obsscholzla:[email protected]. AttorneysforDefendant,DaveA ron berg CA/Arop~~~A¥Wt BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. j/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I EXHIBIT “D” EXHIBIT “D” I BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY EXHIBIT "D" I CA/AroPfi~~P~Ai9Ji BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. ~/27/2023 4:20:48 PM Eiling #115383434 E-Filed 10/21/2020 04:13:35 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND • . : FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC, CASE NO.: 50-2019-CA-01468T-XXXX-MB /. Publisher of THE PALMBEACHPOST. , J ... ' •? D1VISION:AG : ... , \ V \ PlaintifT, ... DAVE ARONBERG. as State Attorney of - . .Palm Beach County, Florida- SHARON R. BOCK, as Clerk and Comptroller ofPalm . Beach County, Florida,. Defendants. PLAINTIFF CA HOLDINGS, LLC’S NOTICE OF DROPPING STATE ATTORNEY, DAVE ARONBERG PlaintifT, CA HOLDINGS, LLC, pursuant to Fla. R. Civ. P. 1250(b), hereby notifies the parties that it has dropped State Attorney, Dave Aronberg from the.above case. Respectfully submitted, GREENBERG TRAURIG, P.A. Attorneysfor CA Florida Holdings, LLC, Publisher of The Palm Beach Post Stephen A. Mendelsohn" Esq., 401 East Las Olas. Boulevard Suite 2000 Boca Raton, Florida 33486 Telephone: (561) 955-7629 Facsimile: (561) 338-7099 . By: /siStephen A. Mendelsohn._ STEPHEN A. MENDELSOHN Florida Bar No. 849324 [email protected] r ■[email protected] I CA/AreTte?)-)Pl® BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY •- 'Ffrli1g 1/us,38343'4 E..:Fi1ed. to/21/2020 o4:]3:3s PM_-· . • . . • . . ' . ,,·. .! • • • • • • ~-. ·_ • . • : . . • • - ·. ~A FLORIDAHOL[?INGS, .LLC, -~ublisher of HIE PAL.J4IJEACH POST, • __ Plain~iff, _ V . . DA VE AROi--!~E~G, ~s State A.homey of-. -,,Palm Beach County, flodda; SHARON rt _- BOCK-, ·a~ Clerk and Comptroller of Palm . Beach County, Florida,. -- • • • Defendants. , - .••• ·- . :, . i ·._ . · .. · • . INTHE<?IRC:UffCOlJRT10FTHE __ - FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND -- -FOR PALM BEACH:t61Jfrfv;•fi:6Rr.r:>A _ . • ·- ·._ i: ·. ·. CASE NO.: 50~·2019~CA-01468t~xxxxsMB - - .. . , . . ' - . . : . . -· . . • •• PLAINTIFF CA HOLDINGS, LLC'S NOTiCE OF DROPPING STATE ATTOR~~Y, DA VEARONBERG , 'Pialritiff; c~ HOLDiNGS,, LLG,pursuanUo Fla.·R. (iv. P. i250(b), hereby"n6tifies.theparties that - -it has dropped Staie Attorney; Dave Aro~berg from the.above case. Respectfully submitted, GREENBERG TRAURIG, P.A. - Attorneys for GA Flohda Holdings, LLC, Publisher ofihePglr,z [Je_acli Post ·- • • . . . . Stephen A. 0Men·ctelsohn; Esq. : 401 East Las Ola:s_ Boulevard $utte 2000 Boca RatonJlorjda 3}486 Telephone: (56 t) 955~7629 Facsi1T1ile: (561) 338-7_099 • -By: /slSiephen A. Mendelsohn . STEPHEN A: MENDELSOHN Florida.Bar No .. 849324 - _ mend.eisohns@utlaw:com sni ith li@gtla\,1.co1i1 ELService(a)utlaw,coni I - I CA/Arcpa~~P~Ai~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. ~/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I By: 7s/ MichaelJGrygiel- . - MICHAEL J GRYGIEL '■ ‘ (Admitted ProHac Vice) : 54 State St:, 6th Floor ; Albany. New York 12207 Telephone: (518) 689-1400 ■ Facsimile: (518) 689; 1499 ' - [email protected] ' / By: h! NindD. Bovajian__ NINA D.BOYAJIAN (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) 1840 Century Park East, Suite 1900 Los Angeles California 90067: ' Telephone: (310) 586-7700 ■ Facsimile: (3'10) 586-7800 bovaj [email protected] [email protected] CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 21$! day of October, 2020, a trite and correct copy of the foregoing has been filed with, the Clerk of the Court-using the State of Florida e-filing system,, which will send a notice of electronic service for all parties of record herein /s/Stephen A. Mendelsohn-_ STEPHEN A, MENDELSOHN ACTIVE 53317341^1 2 i CA/Arop^^O^]^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. ^/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY . . . By: Isl Michael J Gn1giel • MICHAEL J GRYGIEL (Adrriitlecl PrQ Hae Vice) 54 State .St:." 6th Floor. Aibany, Ne~ Y or~ 12207' • . 'feleph9ne: (518) 689~·14_00 · Facsim{le: (5f8) 689:149.9 grv£ielm(@gila\v.co1n. ·:, • By: is/Nina n: Boyaiiari NlNA o: B,OYAJJAN (Adm'iried Pfo Hai:Yice) 1840 Century Park East, Suite 1900 Los'Angeles California .90067; • -Teleph9ne:. (310) 58t~'7700 Facs,iniie: f3'10)°586~7800 bova)1ar'[email protected] · rive raal/@2.t.la \V .coni" . . . . - . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HERE:JJY CER:TiFYthat ori this 2-1 st day bf Ottobef;: 2020; a true and correct copy q{the • f6regoing has~been fil~d with, the Clerk of the Court-using the State of Florida e~frting sy~tem, which will send a notice of electronic service for all parties o_f record herein • isl StepheirA. M~ridel:~ohri. STEPHEN A-:.ME_NDELSOHN ACTI\IE53317341v1 2 CNArcptL8ffl:5?ihl¾ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. ~/27/2023 4:20:48 PM EXHIBIT “E” EXHIBIT “E” CA/Arop^e^0^4, BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 31/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY = EXHIBIT ''E'' EXHIBIT "E'' CA/Aro~ft,~?~A~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. ~/27/2023 4:20:48 PM Jacobs Scholz & Wyler, LLC 961687 Gateway Blvd., Suite 2011 Fernandina Beach, FL 32034 United States 904-261-3693 Jacobs Scholz & Wyler, LLC Dave Aronberg Balance Invoice # Invoice Date Payment Terms Due Date S32,440.00 00307 November 6, 2020 Aronberg (SAO15) adv. CA Florida Holdings, LLC Time Entries Date^ EE Activity Description Rate: Hours. Line Total 11/26/2019 DW Review Initial review of summons and complaint. $425.00 1.5 $637.50 11726/2019 DW Review Reviewed motion for pro hac vice and Judge Hafele: order granting $425.00 0.2 $85.00 11/26/2019 DW Teleconference Teleconference w/ Client, re: response to lawsuit. $425.00 0.5 $212.50 11/26/2019 DW Draft Drafted engagement letter and sent to: client $425.00 0.3: $127.50 11/26/2019 DW Review Reviewed 15th circuit local rules $.425.00 1.0 $425.00 11/26/2019 AU Review Initial review of complaint $475.00 1.0 $475.00 11/26/2019 AU Meeting Meeting w/ DAW to discuss lawsuit and strategy. $475.00 0.5. $237.50 11/26/2019 DW Meeting Meeting w/ AU to discuss lawsuit arid strategy $425.00 6.5 $212.50 11/26/2019 AU Teleconference Teleconference w/Client, re: response to lawsuit $475.00 .0,5: $237.50 12/02/2019 DW Research & Preparation; Research and prep for Motion to dismiss $425.00 2.0 $850.00 12/02/2019 DW; Draft 1 st Draft mdtion to dismiss $425.00 1.0 $425.00 12/02/2019 DW Teleconference Teleconference w/ Client, re?draft motion to dismiss $425.00 0,5 $212.50 12/02/2019 AU Review Reviewed 1st Draft MTDismiss $475.00 6.3 $142.50 12/02/2019 AU Teleconference Teleconference w/ client, re: draft motion to dismiss $475.00 0,5 $237.50 12/03/2019 AU Meeting Meeting w/ DAW, re:, .motion to dismiss. $475.00 O.2 $95;00 12/03/2019 DW Meeting Meeting w/ AU,, re: MTDismiss $425.00 0.2 $85.00 12/06/2019 DW Draft: Completed final draft of motion to dismiss; filed with Court $425.00 0.7 $297,50 12/06/2019 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ client, re: final draft of motion to dismiss $^425.06 6.5 $212.50 CA/Arop^O^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Jacobs '5cholz & Wyler, LLC 961687 Gateway Blvd., Suite 2011 Fernandina Be-ach, FL 32034 United States 904°261-3693 Dave-Aron berg Jacobs Scholz & Wyler; LLC Balance lnvo1c~#: . . . . I lnvoic.e Dc:1te Payrnent "ferrns Due Date' $32,440,00 003.07 Novemb.er 6, 2020 -- .- .--. ---------- ---- ---------------------- -------- ------ -------- ------ -----------.- -------. ------- - - Aronberg {SA015) adv. CA Florida Holdings, LLC Time Entri~s Pate EE Activity o·escription Rate_ Hours. line Total 11/26/2619 bw Review Initial review oi summons and complaint. $425:do 1.5 $637.50 Reviewed motion for pro hac. vice- and Judg_e I 11/26/2019 ow Review Hafele'. order granting $425.00 0.2 $85.00 11 /26/2,01 9 DW Telecohiere'rice Teleconference WI Client, fe:respor']se 101awsu[1 $425.00 0,5 $gt2,50 11/26/2019 ow Draft Drafted engagement letter and sent to client $425;00 0.3. $127.50 11/26/2019 DW Review Reviewed 15th. circuit lq¢al rule_s $425.00 1.0 $425.00 11/26/2019 AIJ Review Initial review ol complaint $475:0d 1.0 $475.00 11/26/2'019 AIJ Meeting Meeting w/ DAW to discuss lawsuit arid strategy $47s.o·o 0.5. $237.50 l'1/26/2019 ow M~tlng Mee_ting w/ AIJ'tq discuss. iaw5-ui\ and sli'?tegy $425:ob 0.5 $212.50 I 11/26/2019 AIJ Teleconference Teleconference w/-Clieni, re, response to lawsuit $475.00 0.5 $237.50 12/02/2619 bW Res_e_arch, & Preparation: R'esearch-ahd prep for'Mcitfontci.dismiss $425.66 2.Q $850.00 12/02/2019 DW Draft 1st Draft.motion io dismiss '$125.00 1.0 $425.00 12/02/2,019 bw Tei_econfenfh9~ Teleconference w/ Client; re::draft motion to dismiss $12sw o._s $212.5() 12102/201~ AIJ Review RevieW~d i st Dr~ft MTDisrhiss $47§:00 0.3 $142.SQ 12/02/201!:) AJJ TelEa?co_nference Teleconference w/ client, re: draft motion to ·$f75.QQ o.~ $23750 dismiss I 1_2/03i2.Q19 }\ij ~eetirig MeetiriQ w/ DAW., re: mpticiri t_o di_s!T]jss I $f?Sc:QQ ·0,2 $95,QO 12/03/2019 ow Meeting Meeting wl AIJ,, re: MTDismiss . I $f25.00 0.2 $85.00 1 2(013/2,019 ow_ Pr.ah; Ce>mpJeted final draftqf motion 16 d_isrhiss; filaj with_ -$h2s:oo O,? $29?-50 Court I -.. 12/06/2019 ow Teleconference Spoke w/ client, re: final draft of motion to dismiss I. . $f25:00· 6.s· $212:so CNArop.fi:m:5?~Ai~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. ~/27/2023 4:20:48 PM 12/06/2019 DW Teleconference Spoke with Clerk'sattorney, re: response; $425.00 0.5 $212.50 12/06/2019 AU Review Reviewed final draft MTDismiss $475,00 0,2 $95,00 12/06/2019 AU Review Reviewed Clerk's: MTDismiss $475.00 0.2 $95.00 12/13/2019 DW Review Reviewed Clerk’s Motion to Dismiss $425.00 0.5 $212.50 01/16/2020 DW Review Reviewed Order Setting Hearing on Defendants'^ MTDismiss $425.00 0.1 $42.50 01/16/2020 DW Review Reviewed motion for pro hac:vice $425.00 0.1 $42.50 01/17/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pl's Amended Complaint $425.00 '1 -0 $425.00 01/17/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke with client, re: Amended Complaint $425.00 0.5 $212.50 01/17/2020 DW Review Reviewed PI'S notice of filing $425.00 0,1 $42.50 01/20/2020 AU Review Reviewed Pi’s Am. Comp! $475.00- 0.3 $142.50 01/21/2020 PW Review Reviewed Judge Marx's Order Cancelling MTDismiss Hearing $425.00 0,1 $42.50 01/21/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pi's Objection to Defendants' MTDismiss $425.00 0.2 $85.00 01/21/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke with client, re: Amended complaint $425.00 .0.5: $212.50 01/21/2020 AU Meeting Meeting w/ DAW, re: response to Am. Compl. $475.00 0.2 $95,00 01721/2020 DW Meeting Meeting wZ AU, re: response to Am. Compl. $425.00 0.2 $85.00 01/22/2020 DW Review Reviewed Order granting, pro haeviceadmission $425.00 0,1 $42.50 01/22/2020 DW Research & Draft Researched and drafted response to Amended Complaint $425.00' 1.0 $425.00 01723/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke with Clerk's attorney, re: response to amended complaint $425.00 0,2 $85:00 01/24/2020 DW Various ■Completed. Answer/MTDismiss Amended Complaint; filed with Court; sent copy to Client. $425.00 1.0 $425.00 01/24/2020 DW Draft Drafted and filed. Noticeof Unavailability $425.00 0.4 $170.00 01/24/2020 AU Review, Reviewed final AnswerZMTDismiss $475.00 0,2 $95.00 01/27/2020 DW Review Reviewed Clerk's Answer/MTDismiss $425:00' 0.3 $127.50 02/03/2020 DW Review Reviewed Order setting: hearing on Defs' MTDismiss $425.00 0-1 $42.50 02/03/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke w/client, re: order setting MTDismiss hearing for March 24, 2020 $425.00 0.5 $212.50 03/13/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pl's Opposition to Aronberg MTDismiss &. Clerk’s MTDismiss $425.00 1.5: $637.50 03/13/2020 AlJ Review Reviewed Pi's Opposition to Aronberg MTDismiss & Clerk's MTDismiss $475.00 0.7 $332.50 03/18/2020 DW Teleconference Reviewed email from Pl's counsel, re: motion to continue hearing $425.00 0.1 $42.50 03/18/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pl’s unopposed motion for continuance $425.00 Ori $42,50. 03/18/2020 DW E-mail Emails w/ Clerk's counsel, re': Pl's request to continue hearing $|25.00' 0.2 $85.00 03/19/2020 DW E-mail Reviewed.email from PI, re: agreed order & responded: $425.00 0,1 $42.50 03/20/2020 DW Review Reviewed Court's agreed drder cdntinuing:hearing $425.00 0.1 $42.50 CA/Arop^^^l^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY 12/06/2019 ow Teleconference Spoke with Clerk's;aitomey,_ re: response $425;00 0.5 $212.50 I AiJ R_eview~g fit,~i c!raffMTDi~rni$S 1 12f9€l/2Q 19 flei'![ew $475:oo o_.2 $95.00 . i. -- - . 12/06/2019 AIJ Review Reviewed Clerk's MTDismiss ' $475.00 I 0.2 $95.00 I 12/13/2019 ow Review Reviewed Clerk's Motion to Dismiss $425.00 r • 0.5 $21250 Of/16/2020 Reviewed Order Setting Hearing, on Defendants'' I $42.50 ow Review $425,00 0.1 MTDismiss I I 01/16/2020 ow Review Reviewed motion Jor pro hac:vice $425.00 0.1 $42.50 I • 01h 7i2Q20 bw Review Reviewed Pl'5- Amer1c:Jed cornplai/it ' $425.00 1.0 $425:oo 01/17/2020 ow Teleconference Spoke with client, re: Amended Compla'.rni $425;00 0.5 $212.50 01/17/2020 ow Review Reviewed Pl's notice 61 filing _$425.QO 0.1 $42.50 01/20i2020 AIJ Review Reviewed Pi's Am. Comp! $475:00· 0.3 $'142.50 01/21/2020 ow Review Reviewed J_udge Marx's Order Cancellinq $425.00: 0.1 $42.50 MTQismi~ Hea,ring 01/21/2020 ow Review R·eviewed Pi's Obje<;:tbn to Defendants' MTbismiss $425:00 0.2 $85.0Q 01/21/2020 ow Teleconference Spoke with client;_ re: Amended complaini $425.00 0.5 $212.50 Oj /g1!2_Q2_() AiJ MEleting ivl_eetirig w/ DAW, re: re$j:lCln5-e tq A,:ri_, Comp'i. $475.QQ Q.2 $95,QO Of/21/2020 ow Meeiihg Meeting w/ AIJ,. re: response to Am. Comp!. $425,00 0.2 $85.00 01/22/2020 ow· Review Reviewed Order granting pro hac, vice-admission $425.00 0,1 $42.50 01/22/2020 ow Research & Draft Rese,irched,{3.ricJ drafted, re$l?9ns~ to Amendeci $425.00• 1.0 $425.00 Complaint 01/23/2020 ow Teleconference ·Spoke with ·c1erk's-attorney, re: response-to $425.00 0.2 $85,00 amended complaint 01/24i2b26 ow Various -C(irr,ipleted_ Aris\ver/~1,:r"Di~rfiiss Alnar\cleci $425.cYo Lb $425.bb Cprflpl~fctt; filed w\th Cpyrt; serj\ c9pytq ¢Jierit. 01/24/2020 ow Draft Drafted and filed Notice-of Unavailabilitya $~25.00 0.4 $170.00 01/24/2020 I'd~ Review, Reviewl:li:l filial Answer/MTDismiss ~$475.QO 0.2 $95.0Q 01/27i2020 DW Review Reviewed Clerk's·Answer/MTOismiss $425:00· 0.3 $127.50 02/03/2020 ow Review Reviewed Order setting: hearing on; Dets: $425,00 0.1 $42.50 f\llTQismiss 02i03/2020 ow Teleconference Spcike wt ciient, re: order'setting MTbismiss $425.60 6.5 $212.50 tiearing !qr March 24, 2q29 03/13/2020 ow Review Reviewed Pl's Opposition.to Aron berg MTDismiss $425.QO 1.5 $637.50 &.Clerk's MTDismiss : 03/13/2020 AIJ RE:lview R_ev·ievvl:lcl Pl's Oppo'sition tq Ar<:>JJbE1rg MTDlsmlss $415.00 Q.7 ~32.56 &.· Ci~rk's MTDi$misS: 03/18/2020 ow· Teleconference R'eviewed email from Pl'.s counsel, re: motion to continue hearing $425.00 0.1 $42.50 ' 03/18/2020 ow· Review Reviel'l'ed PJ's unopposed motion for continuance, $f25;00 0;1 $42,50 03/18/2020 ow· Emails w/Cletk's counsel,,re·: Pl's request to I --- 6.2 .$85.00 E-mail continue hearing $f25.00' ow Reviewed email from Pl; re: agreed order & I $42.50 03/19/2020 E0mail responded $f-25.00- 0,1 I 93/2Q/202Q ow Review Reviewed_ QoLJrt's agreed oraerco11tidLJinQ he,!ring I $42.59 $42!:i.OO 0.1 • I I CA/Arop~~~A~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. j/27/2023 4:20:48 PM 04/21/2020 DW Review Reviewed order rescheduling 'hearing on Defs’ MTDismiss $'12560 0.1 $42.50 04/21/2020 bw Teleconference Spoke w/client; re: order rescheduling MTDismiss hearing for June 3, 2020 $425.00 0.3 $127.50 04/21/2020 AU Review Reviewed Order rescheduling MTDismiss, hearing $4/5.00 0.1 .$47.50 05/22/2020 DW Review Reviewed order setting Zoom hearing, re? MTDismiss $.125.00 0.1 $42,50 05/22/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ client, re: hearing will be via Zoom $425.00 6.2 $85.66 05/27/2020 DW Review Reviewed Clerk's: filing: change of atty of record $425.00 0.1 $42.50 05/27/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke with Clerk's new counsel, Nicole Fingerhut $42560 0;2 $85.00 05/28/2020 DW E-mail Reviewed Pl's email, releases and authorities for MTDismiss hearing; responded $425.00 0.1 $42.50 05/29/2020 DW Preparation Began oral argument prep for 6/8 MTDismiss hearing $425.00 1.0 $425.00 06/01/2020 DW E-mail Reviewed email from Judge Marx's JA and responded $425.00 6.1 $42.50 06/02/2020 DW Various Reviewed Pl's 500+ page binder,- re: MTDismiss & prepped for hearing $425,00 3,0 $1,275.00 06/02/2020 DW E-mail Drafted and sent email to client, re: MTD hearing tomorrow $425.00 0.1 $42.50 06/03/2020 DW Attend Hearing Prepped for and attended MTDismiss hearing via Zoom $425,00 1.5, $637.50 06/03/2020 DW Jeieconference. Spoke w/ Client, re: debrief MTDismiss hearing $425,00 0,5 $212,50 06/03/2020 DW E-mail Emailed courtesy copies of Aronberg's Answer and MTDismiss to Judge Marx: $425.00 0.1 $42.50 06/03/2020 DW E-mail Reviewed response from Client and replied $425.00. 0,1 $42,50 06/03/2020 AU Attend Hearing Attended MTDismiss hearing via Zoom $475.00 16 $475.00 06/03/2020 AU Review Reviewed order granting MTDismiss.w/ prejudice $475.00 0.3 $142.50 06/08/2020 DW Review Reviewed Court's Order Granting Defendants MTDismiss Cpunt.il w/ Prejudice $425.00- 0.5 $212,50 06/08/2020 DW Various ■Shared order w/ Client and spoke w/, re: result and plan going forward, re::57.105 $425.00 0.5: $212.50 06/08/2020 DW Various Researched § 57.105 Fla. Stat ; drafted 57.105 demand letter and proposed motion for attorneys' fees/sanctions; Served Pl's courisei;with,de.mand letter and proposed motion. $425.00 26 $850.00 06/08/2020 AU Meeting Meeting w/ DAW, re: Order & 57.105 $475.00 0.3 $142.50' 06/08/2020 DW Meeting Meeting w/ AU, re: Order & 57-1.05 $425.00 0,3 $127.50 06/08/2020 AU Review Reviewed 57.105 demand and proposed motion for sanction $475.00 0.2 $95.00 06/10/2020 DW Various Reviewed notice of change ofattorney, re: Clerk; ■called and spoke w/ new counsel Cynthia Guerra i $425.00' 06 $127,50 06/23/2020 pw Various Reviewed Pl's letter refusing to voluntarily dismiss amended complaint despite 57.105 demand: called arid spoke w/ cl lent, re: Pl's refusal & next steps $425,00 1,0 $425.00 CA/Ar^ft® BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM ’ ’ ’ NOT A CERTIFIED COPY 04/21/2020 bW Review Reviewed order rescheduling hearing on Defs' J MTDismiss $425.00 0.1 $42.50 I . 04/21/2020 ow Teieconferl,lnce Spok€i w/ cli~nt; re: ortjer•resctied_uilng :Mi'pi$h'liss I 0.3 $127.50 hea~[hg ic5r jur,er:3, 292_0 $425.00 I • 0,4/21/2020 AIJ Review Reviewed Order rescheduling MTDismisshearing t .. $475.oo· I 0.1 .$47.50 I 05/2.2/2Q20 ow Review Reviewed order setting Zoom hearing_, re.:.' $425:_0Q 0.1 $44.50 MTDismiss i 05/22/2020 bW Teleconference :Spoke w/ dient, re: hearingwill be via Zoom $425.bb 6.2 $85.ob 05/27/2020 ow Review Reviewed Clerk's;filing: chan_ge of atty of record $425.00 0.1 $42.50 05/27/2920 Dv,_t T eiecob!e.re.nce Spo_k_Ei V{it.~ Q!e.rk'.$ new ¢u.ns€il, N[cqle Fi_ngerfiUJ ·$42§;QO 0;2_ $_!35.QO 05/28/2020 ow E0mail Reviewed Pl's email, re:,cases and authorities for $425:00 0.1 $42.50 MTDismiss hearing;_responded 05/29/2920 ow Prepari;\tion Be9ar:i oral argument prep for 6/8.MTDJsniiss liearing $425.60 1.Q $42$.06 06/01/2020 ow E0mail R·eviewed email from Judge Marx's JA and $425.00 0.1 $42.50 responded Of3/02/2_Q2Q ow Va·rlous Reviewed Pl's 500.+ page binder.,- re: MTDismiss & prepped fi:Jr h_ea,ring $425_,0Q ,3,.Q $1,275.QO 06/02/2020 ow E-mail Drafted :and !lent em~if to client, re: Mn::i h€ia"iirig 1omcirrow $425.00 ().1 $42.50 0,6/03/2020 ow· Attend Hearir,g Prepped for and attended MTDismiss,hearing via $425,00 1.5. $6_37.50 Zoom 06/03i2_Q2Q ow :re(e¢C?n fere,o¢e Spqke WI g1iemt, re: c::Je6riefMt_bismiss he.w-J.ng $425_.0Q 0.5 $212,.50 06/0312020 ow· E0mail Emailed.courtesy-copies of Aronberg's Answer and MTDismiss.to Judge•Marx: $425.00 0.1 $42.50 06/0~/2020 QW E-mail Reviewed re~p<mM from Client anc;! il,lplied $4?5,09, 0.1 $42.50 06/03/2020 AIJ Attend Hearing Attended MTbismiss hearing Via Zoom $475.bb 1.0 $475.ob 06/03/2020 AIJ Review Reviewed order,granting MTDismiss.w/ prejudice $475.0:0 0.3 $142.50 06/08/2020 DW' Review Fi~viewed Couf1's Qrder Grantfng D\;ifend1Y7t~ $425:0ci· 0.5 $212.50 MTbismi$S C9Lmt.il w/Prejudice 06/08/2020 ow ·various -Shared orderw/ Client-and spoke w/, re: rest.iii and $425.00 0.5 $~12,50 :plan going forward, re::57.105 Researched§ 57.105 Fla,Stat.;-d_rafted 57.. t05 06108/2020 OW Various derTl.3.i'id iEJtter a):ld proposed mqtiqo /or-,attorheys' $425;0() 2.6 $850.00 ieW~wicti611s; Se.rv§lo Pl'§ couns_efwith_d.~rna11q ietter and pr_oposeq flio\i6ri. 06/08i202ci AIJ Meeting Meeting wi DAW; re: Order & 57.i 05 $475:00- 0.3 $142.50 06lQ8/2020 ow Me.eting Meeting wl AIJ, r!;l: Order & 57.105 $425.00 0.3 $127.50 06/0812020 AIJ Review Reviewed 57.i 05 demand and proposed motion for $475.oo· 0.2 $95.00 -sanction Reviewed notice of change,ofattorney, re: Clerk; .1 013/1 01gp2q ow Various $425;o_o: 0,;3 $12?.50 -called and· spoke w/ new .counsel Cynthia Guerra I RevieiYed_ p·1•s "i~tt¢r refusing to v9IQ11tatily disrr.ii?s· I 06/23/2020 bw Vario.Us am.e11d~d tonipialnt despite 57.105 demarig; calJed $425:00 J.O $4:25.00 ~rid ?PPke. v-1i tjieht, !¢:_ Pl's. ref_u_Sql ~ ne.~t Stl,lp~ I -- CA/Ar0f?fl8Ei?~A.t¾ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM l 06723/2020 DW E-mail Sent client copy of Pl's letter refusing to:dismiss complaint $425.00 I 0.1 $42.50 06/23/2020 AIJ Review Reviewed Pi's letter refusing to dismiss Count-1/Am. Compl. $475.00 I ' ' 0.1 $47.50 07/01/2020 DW Various •Spoke w/client, re: filing of 57.105 motion for fees/sanctions; filed motion for attorneys' fees; based on Pl's failure to voluntarily dismiss amended complaint count i i $425.00 i 0.5 $212.50 07/02/2020 DW E-mail Email to client, re: affidavit and summary judgment $425.00 0.1 $42.50 07/08/2020 DW Teleconference Discussed w/ Client drafting arid filing Motion for Summary Judgment arid MSJevidence $425.00 0.7 $297.50 07/08/2020 AIJ Teleconference Discussed w/ Client drafting and filing Motion for' Summary Judgment and MSJ evidence $475.00 0.7 $332.50 07/10/2020 DW Draff Created 1st draft of Aronberg Affidavit;;shared w/ client $425.00 1.0 $425.00 07/10/2020 AIJ Various Reviewed draft affidavit and discussed.w/'DAW :$475.00 0.3. $142.50 07/10/2020 DW Meeting Discussed draft affidavit w/ AIJ $425.00 0,2 $85,00 07/13/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pl's Request to Produce, re: Clerk $425.00 0.1 $42.50 07/13/2020 DW" Teleconference Spoke w/ Clerk's counsel, re: Request to Produce $425.00 0,2. $85.00 07/27/2020 DW Review Reviewed PTs Amended Request to Produce, re: Clerk $425.00- 6.1 .$42.50 07/27/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ Clerk's counsel, re: Amended Request’to Produce $425.00 .0.1 $42,50 07/28/2020 DW Pfaff Revised Aronbergaffidavit $425.00 0,5 $212.50 07/29/2020 DW Draft. Finalized Aronberg Affidavit and sent to "client $425.00 0.5 $212.50 07/29/2020 DW Research & Preparation Research: and prep for Motion for Summary Judgment $425.00 1.0 $425.00 07/30/2020 DW Various Received executed Aronberg Affidavit $425.00 0.1 $42.50 07/30/2020 DW Draft: Began drafting Motion for Summary Judgment $425.00 2.0 $850.00 08/05/2020 DW Draft: Continued drafting Motion for Summary Judgment $425.00 i.O $425.00 08/07/2020 DW Review Reviewed email from Plaintiff attempting to set hearing on 57.105 motion for fees/sanctions $425.00 0.1 $42,50 08/10/2020 DW E-mail Sent responsive email to Pl's counsel $425.00 0.1 $42-50 08/17/2020 DW Meeting Discussed draft MSJ w/AIJ $425.00 0.2 - $85.00 08/17/2020 AIJ Various Reviewed draft MSJ and met w/ DAW to discuss $475.00 0,5 $237.50 08/18/2020 DW Draft Finalized Motion for Summary Judgment;-filed w/ court-along with Aronberg affidavit $425.00 2.0 $850.00 08/27/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ Clerk's counsel, re; request to produce $425.00 0.1 $42.50 09/0.1/2020 DW Various Reviewed Pl's email and accepted conference call invite for 9/2/20 I. . $425.00 0.1 $42.50 09/02/2020 DW Review Reviewed Clerk's response to request for production $425.00 I 0.2 $85.00 09/02/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ P|'s counsel, re: dispute as to whether MSJ should be heard before 57.105 fee motion or vis versa ■Call was unsuccessful $z 25.00. 0.5 $212.50 CA/Aropfp^O^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Sent client copy of Pl's letter relusing·to dismiss I 06/23/2020 DW E0mail $425:oo 0.1 $42.50 ·complaint I ()6/2:3/202Q Reviewed Pi's lett_er reiusing to clismiss ¢oUnt· I/Km. I $47.5(> AIJ Review $475.00 9.1 CgrnpL I :Spoke w/ client; re; filing of 57.105 motion for I I fees/sanctions; filed motion for attorneys' fees, I 07/01/2020 DW Various .based on Pl;s failure to voluntarily dismiss $425:00 0.5 $212.50 I .amended complaini count 1 ! 07/02/2020 DW E0 mail Eni.ail to client, re: affiaavit and summary jud!;]ment $425:oo 0.1 $42.50 07/08/2020 DW Teleconference Discussed wl Cl,eht drafting and filing Mot/on ·1or -~25.00 0.7 $297.50 Summary Judgment and MSJ evidence 07/08/2020 AIJ Teleconference Discussed w/ Client drafting and filing Motion for· $475.00 ,0.7 $332.50 Summary)udgment and MSJ evidence 07/10/202() DW Draft' GrEicited i st:dri:J.ij 9f Arontierg Afiid~vit; $hared w/ $425.00 1.0 $425.00 cHent 07/10/2020 AIJ Various Reviewed draft affidavit and discussed w/'DAW $475.00 0.3. $'142.50 07/10/2020 DW Me(lting Discussed qfaft affidavit wl AIJ $425:0.P· 0.2 $85,00 07/13/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pl"s Request to Produce, re: Clerk $425.bb· 0.1 $42.50 0,7/13/2020 DW Telecqnference Spoke w/ Clerk's counsel, re: Request to Produce $425:00 0..2 $85.00 07/27/2020 DW Review Revie\\iad Pl;s Amended Reque$t to Prod1J9e, re: $425.00- 0.1 .$42.50 Clerk 07/27/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ Cler~·s counsel, re: Amended Requesf to $425.QO .0.1 $42,50 Produce Q7/2~/2Q2Q QW Qrait Revise:d Aro_n_berg <1ff1c!cJ.y11 '$12,;i.QP 0,5 $212.50 07/29/2020 DW Drafi Finalized Aronberg Affidavitand sentib:clieht $425.00 0.5 $212.50 07/29/2Q2.0. bw 8_esearch8,.• Research,~r'id prep lorM6tiqn for .Surilmary $425:QQ· 1.0 $425.QO Prepciratibri .,LudgnienJ 07/3()/202() DW Various R·eceived executed Aronberg Affidavit $425.00 0.1 $42.50 07/30/2020 ow Draft: Began drafting Motion for Summary Judgment $425.00 2.0 $850.00 9$/95/2()2() ow Orel.It Con tinLJed dr?,lting Motion l9r Sumniaj"y Juggment $425.0_0 i.9 $425.0() 08/_07 /2020 DW Review Reviewed emaillrom Plaintiff attempiin_g io set $425.00 0.1 $42.50 hearing on 57.:105 mcition:lor lees/sanctions 08/10/2020 ow E-mail $ant respo11sjve email. to Pl's_ ¢6u[IS$I $425.0_0: 0.1 $42,50 08/17/2020 DW Meeting Discussed draft MSJ w/ AIJ $425.00 0.2 $85.00 08/17/2020 AIJ Various Review_ed d_ralt MSJ arid met w/ OAW to discuss $475.00 0.5, $237.50 08/18/2020 DW Drafi Finaiized Motion for S4mma,y Judgment;· filed wl $425;00, 2.0 $850.00 court-?long with Aronberg affidavit 08/27/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ Cl~rk's cquns_el, re: request to produce $425.00 0.1 $42.50 09/0,1/2020 OW Reivfoweci Pl's em?il and c1ccept~d cc>"nle_re11ce gali I Various $425.00 0.1 $42.50 irrvite \qr 9/2/20 I Reviewed Clerk's response io request for ; 09/02/2020 DW Review $425.00 0.2 $85.00 production I • I ~po~e w/ Pl's c:purisel, re: dispLJte as to .whether I I DW . . $425.00. $212.50 09/02/2020 Telecon!erence MS_J should. b~ heard before 57. 105 fee motion or 0.5. vis versa ·,-call was unsuci;esslul I • CNArop~?iJ\.~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3(27/2023 4:20:48 PM I 09/02/2020 AU Meeting Discussed w/ DAW phone call w/ Pl's counsel $475.00 0.2 $95.00 09/02/2020 DW Meeting Discussed w/;AIJ phone call w/ PI'S counsel $425.00 0,2 $85,00 09/16/2020 DW E-mail Reviewed email from: Pl's counsel requested Aronberg to withdrawsanctions motion w/o prejudice $425.00. 6.1 $42.50 09/17/2020 DW Meeting Discussed w/AU filing motion for CMC $425.00 0.1 $42,50 09/17/2020 AU Meeting Discussed w/ DAW filing motion for CMC $475.00 0.1 $47.50 09/18/2020 DW Various Drafted and filed motion to set case management conference;re: MSJ 1st or Fee hearing 1st $425.00 06 $21260 09/18/2020 DW E-mail Responded to PI'S 9/16/20 email and refused to withdraw 57.105 motion'; provided copy of motion to set CMC and available dates for hearing $425.00 0.1 $42.50 0.9/18/2020 DW E-mail Reviewed Pl’s email insisting that.57.165 motion be withdrawn $425.00 0,1 $42,50 09/18/2020 DW E-mail Replied to Pl's counsel that the 57.105 motion for sanctions will not be withdrawn arid asking for .response, re: CMC $425.00 0.1 $4260 09/18/2020 DW E-mail :Sent client copy of email exchange w/ Pl's counsel; called and spoke w/ Client $425.00 0.5, $212.50 09/22/2020 DW Various Drafted and filed: Notice of Hearing on 10/15/20; set up Court Call; spoke.w/ client, re: hearing date $425.00 0,7 $29760 TO/02/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pl's Memo of Law opposing Aronberg's 57.105 motion for fees/sahctions $425.00 6.7 $297.50 10/02/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pl's Response to Aronberg's request to schedule 57.105 motion for fees after MSJ $425.00 0.5 $21260 10/02/2020 AU Review Reviewed PI'S Memo of Law: opposing 57.105 motion $4/5.00 66 $23760 10/02/2020 AU Review Reviewed Pl's Response to Aronberg's request to schedule 57.105 motion 'after MSJ $47560 0.4 $190.00 10/12/2026 DW Research Researcficaselaw & statutes, re: response to PI'S Memo of Law $425.00 1.0 $42560 10/13/2020 DW Research & Analyze Continued researching caselaw, rekresponseto Pls memo of law $425.00 16 $425.00 10/13/2020 DW Draft: Created 1st draffof Response to Pl's Memo of Law and shared w/ Client $42560' 46 $1,700.00 10/13/2020 DW: Meeting Discussed w/ AlJ caselaw and draft response to memo $425.00 0.5 $212.50 10/13/2020 AU Various Reviewed draft MSJ, discussed draft w/ DAW and, caselaw $47560 0,7‘ $332.50 10/14/2020 DW Draft Finalized arid filed Response to Pl's Memo.of Law $42560 16 $425,00 10/14/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: memo of law $425.00 0.2 $85.00 10/14/2020 PW Telephone Spoke w/ client again, re: response to memo of law $425.00 0.1 $42,50 10/15/2020 DW Attend Hearing Attended hearing, re: Motion to Set CMC; called client to discuss $425.00 16 $637.50 10/15/2020 PW Various Reviewed email and letter from PI, re. settlement- Sent copy to Client and called to: discuss; $' ■25.00 0.5 $21260 CA/Arofft®p?]®[ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY I 09/02/2020 AIJ Meeting Discussed w/ DAW phone call w/ Pt's counsel $475:00 - I 0.2 ~95.00 Discussed wlAtJ • fione.cafi wt Pt's counsel I 09.f.92/2_S)2Q DW ~~$tiri~ $425:oo 0,2 $85.00 - - - - ... . . -- _p . - -- ----- . - - -- -- - "j , .. -- Reviewed email from Pt's counsel requested I 09/16/2020 ow· E-mail Aronberg to wiihdraw'sanctions motion wio $425.00 0.1 $42.50 prejudice I I 09/1 7 /.20';.0 DW_ M?eting Discussed w/(\IJ filing m_otion for CMG $125.QO 0.1 $42.50 09/17/2020 AIJ Meeting Discussed w/ DAW filing motion for CMG J ~75.00 0.1 $47.50 09/18/2!)2() ow V?fiqus D'rafted arid filed moiion lo set.case management $425.09 0.5 $212.50 -conference_:; re: MSJ 1st or Fee hearing_ 1st ' R$sppnded to Pf's Q/1 fl/2Q ¢maii ~nd refuseg 19 9!:i11s12020 ow E-mail withdraw !?7. i 65 motion·; provided cqpy of motion 19 $425.00 o.i $42.50 $et: dMt a:nd available i::iates for hearing 0_9/18/2020 ow· E-mail Reviewed Pt's email insisting that.57.105 motion_be $425;00 Q.1 $42.50 wiihdrawn Replied to Prs,cour:isel that the 57 .105' motion for _09/18/2020 PVv E-rrjail sarictioi,s will not be withdrawn iincl_,askjrlg for $1;25.QO 0.1 $42,50 .respori$e, re: CMQ: ' 09/18/2020 DW E~mail ,sent clieni copy of email exchangew/ Pl's counsel; $425:00 0.5. $212.50 called and spoke w/Client - ' : 09/2_2i2Q20 DW ·Various Ora.fled and filed Notice qi Hearing on 10/15/20; set $425.00 0.7 $297.50 up Court Call; spoke w/ client;. re: hearing date 1 __ , .. 10/02/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pl's M)?mg. pf Law opPQsing Aronberg;s $425.00 o.7 $297.50 57: 105 motion for fees/sanctions : Revie1ved Pt's t=!esponse to A(onberg's request to I 1 0/0_2/2020 DW Review _schedule 57.105 motion for fees afterMSJ $425.00 0.5 $212,50 Rt?vie\'ied Pt's MerncH,f La,w ◊pPOsing 57, 1 o_5 ' 1btb2i2026 AIJ Review .r:notion $41s.o·o .0.5 $237.sb 10/02/2020 AIJ Review Reviewed Pt's Response to Aronberg's request to $475.00 0.4 $190.00 schedule 57.105 motion after MSJ i0/12/2020 DW Research Be$ear'¢fl:C:aseja~ & statut_es,re: response to Pt's Mein66f Law $125:60 i.o $425.06 10/13/2020 DW Research & Continued researching caselaw, re::response· to }425.00 1.0 $425.00 Analyze Pl:s memo of law 10/13/20_20 DW Qratt Create_d 1 stdraft·of Response to Pl's Memo of Law $425;00 4.0 $1,700.00 and shared w/ Client 10/13/2020 ow Meeting Disqjssed w/ AIJ c~seiaw and drait respbhS? to $425:00 0.5 $212.50 mt;!m<:> 10/13/2020 AIJ \(arious Reviewed draft MSJ, discussed draft w/ PAW and $475.00 0,7' $332.50 .caselaw 10/14/2_Q2Q b\N Dratt F[naUz:e~ aricl fi!$c:! l=lgsj:lori~ to Pj's M?rTJ0:9(L<1w $425.:00 LO $425,00 10/14/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: memo of law $425.00 0.2 $85.00 I 10/14/2020 DW Telephone Spo_ke w/clien_t ·again, re: response to memo of law ·$425.00 I' 0.1 $42,50 Attended headrig, re: Motion to Set CMC; called I 10/15/2020 DW .Attend Hearing $425.00 1.5 $637.50 •client to discuss I I Reviewed en,_ail and letter from P.I, re: settlement.. . I $212.50 10/15/2020 ow Various $425.00 0.5 Sent copy to Client and called to discuss. I CA/Aropft:m:5?~Ai~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3(27/2023 4:20:48 PM 10/15/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ PEs counsel, re: settlement: $425.00 0.1 $42.50 10/15/2020 pw Telephone. Spoke w/ client, re: Pi's settlement proposal $425.00 0,2 $85,00 10/15/2020 AU Various Attended hearing, re: motion to set CMC; discussed w/ client. $' 75.00 1.0 $475.00 10/15/2020 AIJ Various Discussed Pl's settlement proposal,w/ DAW and then w/ Client. & 75.00 0.4 $190.00 10/15/2020 pw Meeting Discussed P|'s settlement'proposal w/ AU $425.00 0,2 $85.00 10/16/2020 Pw Various Drafted and shared proposed order w/ Pl's counsel $425.00 0.5 $212.50 10/16/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ Pl's counsel, re: settlement. $425.00 0.2 $85.00 10/16/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: Pl's settlement proposal $425.00 0,5 S212.50 10/16/2020 DW Meeting Discussed Pl's w/ AU $425.00 0.2 $85.00 10/16/2020 AU Meeting Discussed Pl's settlement proposal w/ DAW $475.00 0.2 $95.00 10/19/2020 DW Various Uploaded.proposed order, re: CMC for-Judge Hafele, $425.00 0.1 $42.50 10/19/2020 DW Telephone- Spoke w/client, re: Pl's settlement proposal $425,00 0.2 $85,00 10/19/2020 DW 'Telephone. Spoke w/ Pl’s counsel, re: settlement $42500 6.1 $42.50 10/19/2020 AU Meeting Discussed Pl's settlement proposal w/ DAW $475.00 0.2 $95.00 10/19/2020 ' pw Meeting Discussed Pl's settlement proposal w/ AlJ $425,00 0.2 $85.00 10/20/2020 DW Various Reviewed email from PI, resettlement; sent copy, to Client and called to discuss $425.00 0.5 $212.50 10/20/2020 DW Telephone Spoke, w/client, re: settlement $425.00 0,4 $170.00 10/20/202'0 DW Telephone Spoke w/ Pl's counsel, re: settlement: $425.00 0.1 $42.50 10/20/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: settlement $425.00 0.1 $42.50 10/20/2020 DW Meeting Discussedi Pl’ssettlement proposal w/AU $425.00 Q.2 $85,00 10/20/2020 AU Meeting Discussed Pl's settlement proposal w/ DAW $475:00 0.2 $95.00 10/21/2020 DW Various Drafted and filed Motion to Set Hearing on Aronberg MSJ; drafted proposed order granting motion to set; checked.court availability; emailed Pl’s counsel,,re: choose date for hearing $425.00 i.O $425.00 10/21/2020 DW Review Reviewed Order, re: CMC unnecessary $425.00 0.1 $42.50 10/21/2020 PW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: media response $425.00 0.2 $85,00 10/21/2020 PW Telephone. Spoke w/client, re: media response $425.00 0.1 $42.50 10/21/2020 DW Telephone! Spoke w/ client, re: media response $425.00 0.1 $42.50 10/21/2020 pw Telephone Spoke w/ client, re:- media response $425,00 0.1 $42.50 10/21/2020 DW Telephone: Spoke w/client, re: media response $425.00 0.1 $42.50 10/2172020 DW E-mail Sent email w/ Aronberg statement to media $425.00 0,1 $42,50 10/21/2020 AU Meeting Discussed media response w/ DAW $475.00 0.3 $142.50 10/21/2020 DW Meeting Discussed media response-w/ AU $425.00: 0.3 $127.50 10/22/2020 DW Various Reviewed Pl’s Notice of Dropping Aronberg as party; spoke w/ Cliehtahd AU, re: notice and next steps $425,00 0-5 $212.50 CA/Arop^o^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY 10/15/2020 ow Telephone Spoke w/ Pl'.s counsel, re: settlement: I . $425.00 I 0.1 ~42.50 10/1§/2Q2Q Spqke WI cli~rit, re: _pi·s se!l[e1J1§.ii..t_grcip9s)ll I ow JeJ~phorie $425:oo 0,2 $85._00 . i , __ .. Attended hearing, re: motion to sei CMC; I i Q/15/2!)20 AIJ va:rious $475.00 1.Q $475.00 discussed w/ clieni: I -- I Discussed Prs setilement proposalw/DAWand 10/15/2020 AIJ Various then w/ Client. I $V5.o_o 0.4 $190.00 I I 10/15/2020 ow Meeting Dis_cu_ss_ed Pl's settlement proposal w/ AIJ $425.00 ·r 0.2 $85.00 1011si2b26 bW Various Drafted and shared proposed order w/ Pl's counsel $425.00 I (l.5 $212.50 10/16/2020 ow Telephone Spoke w/ Pl's counsel; re: settlement $425.00 0.2 $85.00 1 0(1 6/2.020 DV'/_ T e_jeJ:ih9_ije_ Spokei w_/ dierit, re: f'l's i:;el!fe_rile_nf_proposal ·$42_5;9_0 0,? $212.150 10/16/2020 ow Meeting Discussed Pl's settlement·proposaLwFAIJ $425.00 0.2 $85.00 10/16/2020 AIJ Meeting Discussed Pl'§ settlementpfoposahv/ DAW $475.QO 0.2 $95.00 10/19/2020 ow Various Uploaded:proposed order, re: CMC for,Judge $425.00 0.1 $42.50 Hafele 10/19/2020 PW Telephone Spoke y,,/ client, re: Pl's_ settlementpr.oposal ·$425.QO 0.2 $85.00 10i19i2020 ow· Telephone. Spoke wi Pl's c9llnsel, re: setti~ment $425:00 6.1 $42.50 10/19/2020 AIJ Meeting Discussed .Pl's settlement proposal w/ DAW $475.00 0.2 $95.00 1oh9/2020 pw Meet1nQ Dis:cuss:ed Pl's settleine_tit propo$al_ w!_AIJ $42_q.OQ 0.2 $?5.00 10/20/2020 DW Various Reviewed email from Pl 1 re: setilemerit; sent copy_ $425.00 0.5 $212.50 io Client and called to discuss 10/20/2020 ow Telephone Spokew/ client, re: settlement $425.00 DA $170.00 10/20/2020 ow Telephone Spoke wi Pl's counsel, re: settlement .$425:oo- 0.1 $42.50 10/20/2020 ow Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: sehlemeni .$425,00 0.1 $42.50 1 O/g0/2_02_() bw Mee~ng Dis_ciJss_el<{ :P11~ settl_ement prqpcis~i w.rAfJ $425:l)O Q.2 $85,QO 10/20/2020 AIJ Meeting Discussed Pl's settlementproposalw/ DAW $475;00 0.2 $95.00 Drafted and file_d Motion to_ Set Hearjri9 6ii 10/21/202!) ow Vafious Arontie_rg M$.J; drafte,<:l_ pfopo_sed or,<:ler wanting $425.00 1.0 $425.0() motion to set; checked court availaoilify; .emailed Pl's co_unsel, ,re: ch90se pate for hearing 10/21/2°020 ow Review Reviewed Order,.re: CMG unnecessary $425.ob 6.1 $42.50 10/21/2020 DW Telephone Spoke y,,/clien_t, re_: rne_dia rJ;lspo_ns_e ·$425.00 0.2 $85,00 10/21/202Q bW' Telephone. Sp9ke w/ client, re: tnetjia: response $425.00 0.1 $42.?0 10/21/2020 ow Telephone, Spoke w/clieni, re: media response ;$425.00 0.1 $42.50 • ' 10/2J/2()20 PW Tei.eRh:o;:,~ $P,ok,e y,1i ¢1jent, :re:- media response $42~._0Q 0.1 $42.50 10/21/2020 ow ·Telephone ,spoke w/ client, re: media response $425.00 0.1 $42.50 10/21l20;?0 DW E-rnail Sent eryiai! w/ /\ronberg st11tement to m_edja $42Q.Q0 0,:1 $42.50 10/21/2020 AIJ Meeting Discussed media response w/ DAW $475.00 0.3 $i42.5b ! 10/21/2020 ow Meeting Discussed media response,w/ AIJ $425.00 0.3. $127.50 I R_eview!3cl Pl's Not[ce oi Qi'\'Jppir\g Arj)]ltlerg as ' ; 10/22/2_02_() ow Varicius p_arty;· spok"!? ~/GllEintand A1J, re: no~c_e ?-Qcl ne~t' $425:00- 0.5 $212.!?0 steps ·1 ·• ··- I CA/Aropffffl5?iJ\.¥R! BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM ! 10/22/2020 AU 'Various Reviewed Pl's Notice of, Dropping Aronberg as party ; spoke w/ Client and DAW, re: notice and next steps 75.00 0.5: $237.50 Totals: 74.8 $32,440.00 Time-Entry Sub-Total:: $32,440.00 Sub-Total: $32,440.00 Total: Amount Paid: $32,440.00 $0.00 Balance Due: $32,440,00 CA/AroPteb°iffik BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3^27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Reviewed Pl's Notice cit, Dropping Aronberg as 10/22/2020 AIJ 'Various ·party__; spoke·w/Client and DAW, re: notice and next steps $175:00 I 0.5 $237.50 I . Totals: I 74.8 $32,_440.00 I . . Tirrie,Entry. Sub-Total: I . . . • Sub,Totc1I: Total: ArriQj.1_ntPaid: Balance:oue: ' $32,440.00 $32;440.00 $32/M0.0O $0.00 $32,440,00 CA/Arop~~~)\¥K¼_ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3r27/2023 4:20:48 PM EXHIBIT “F” i EXHIBIT “F” I BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY EXHIBIT· "F" EXHIBIT ''F" CNArop~?i~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3(27/2023 4:20:48 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA GA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC, Publisher of the. PALM BEACH POST, Plaintiff, V. • CASE NO.: 19-CA-014681 DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida; SHARON R. BOCK, as Clerk and Comptroller of Palm Beach County, Florida. Defendants. __:_/ AFFIDAVIT OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF NASSAU BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority appeared Douglas A. Wyler, Esq., who, after being first duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. Affiant is a partner of JACOBS, SCHOLZ & WYLER, LLC, counsel for Defendant, DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida, ("Aronberg”), as well as general counsel to the Florida.Prosecuting Attorneys Association, (“FPAA"), and makes this Affidavit of his own personal knowledge. 2_. Affiant is licensed to practice law in the State: of Florida, is an active member of the Florida Bar in good standing and has engaged in the practice of law in the State of Florida since 2015. 3. As detailed herein,theservices rendered by Affiant and his firm pertain to Affiant’s demand letter and motion for attorneys’ fees sent to Plaintiffs counsel pursuant to § 57.105, Florida Statutes, om'June 87 20207in’defendihgagainsfCbuhfT of PlaintiffsjAlfteTide I i CA/Arop^O^, BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY .· IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL <HRCUIT IN ANb ~OR PALM B.EA~H COUNTY, FLORIDA 1 •· •, • I GA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC, I Publisher of the. PALM .BEACH POST, Plaintiff, • y. DAVE ARONBERG, a~ State Attotney of Pal_m B~ach County, Florida; SHARON.R> 130¢k, as Cierk and Comptroiler of Palm • Beach Coµnt)\ Florida. • Defendants. I --------------- CASE NO.: 19-CA-01468i AFFIDAVIT OFATTORNEYS' FEES STATE Of FLORIDA COUNTY OF NASSAU BEFORE ME, the unpersigne_d aut~ority appeared Dougla~ A. W)'.ler, Esq., who, after being .first duly s\vom, deposes and says: I. Affiant 1s a partner of JACOBS, SCHOLZ &. WYLER, LLC, counsel for Defenc!aflt, DAVE ARON BERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County; Florida, ("Aronberg''), . . as well as general counsel to the Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association, (''FPAA"); and makes this Affidavit of his own personal ,knowledge.,· 2_. AJfiant ·is licens~d to pra9tice law 1n the State of Florida, is an active member of ·the Florida Bar in good standingandhas·engaged in the practice of law 1nthe Suite of Florida since 2015. 3. As d~tailed herein,:the services ren9ered by Affiant and his firm pertain to Affiant's demand letter and motion for attorrieys' ~ees sent_to Plaintiffs cmmsel Trsuant to§ 57:105, •• •• Florida srnmtes;-oiY:June s;· 202o;irfdefend ifiifagaiffsfCounrLof Plaintiff ~ItJ,:-r11ended :co-mp Jaine •• .. I ! CA/Arof1~~i'h.¥M BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I and Plaintiffs October 21, 2020 Notice of Dropping State Attorney. Dave Aronberg from the above-captioned lawsuit. See, Exhibits “A ” and “B” attached hereto. 4. The total time Affiant's law firm has expended services rendered, to.date is 74.8 hours, however, from-the date, of Defendant Aronberg’s 57.105 demand, Affiant’s, law firm has expended a total of 42.2 hours; Of the: 42.2 hours expended since Defendant-Aronberg’s 57.105 demand was served, the.Affiant 5. Of the 42.2 hours expended since Defendant Aronberg’s 57.105 demand was , served, the total time.Affiant has expended services rendered to date is 35.4 hours at the rate of S425.00 per hour. Likewise, the total time Affiant's law partner, Arthur,!. Jacobs, has expended services rendered to date is 6.8 hours at the rate of S475.00 per hour-. 6/ Accordingly-, since Defendant Aronberg’s 57.105 demand was served, Defendant Aronberg’s counsel; JACOBS, SCHOLZ & WYLER, LLC, has rendered services in the amount of$18,275.00, in conjunction with the.defense ofthe instant action pursuant to § 57.105, Florida Statutes. See, Exhibit “C” attached hereto. 7. Affiant expects to incur an additional 4.0 hours at $425.00 an hour in preparing for and attending the hearing on attorneys’ fees. Thus, the total amount of hourly attorneys’ fees the State Attorney is seeking is 46.2 hours for a total of $19,975.00. Additionally-, the State Attorney seeks a multiplier of 2.0, which when applied makes the grand total attorneys’ fees sought herein $39,950.00 Dated th is 9th.day of November, 2020, FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY and Plaintiff'.) oaober 21, 2020 Notice ofDrokping State Attorney, Dave Aron~erg:from the . <. · .. :,,•.. . .· . . . ·. - . . - .. · .. - - r .. - ·.· . above~captioned la\ysuit. See, Exliibits ''A" and "B''iitiached hereto. . ' . ·- .- -- •. ' .. ,- .- . ·_ . ,. .-·. -·· _._ •. ··_. - . ·, I .· • .· . . • .. • ·.. I . _, The totai ti~e Affiant;s iaw firm his expended ,servicis rendered, to date IS 74~8 . ·. . ~ . . , .• . . - . : - - • - ·: • • ';" , - • . . : - -~ . , - - . . . , - -, • hou~, _ho~veveri ,frqrriit_he.dite, of l)efendanr'Aronberg's 57, ios d~m~n:( Affiant'.~Jai firm has > - __ .,. , ••• ··-·= •• ·-· - - --- - • . • •.• • • . expehdeda!otal of42.2,hours, Qfthe:·42,2h'oim~expenaed since befendant-Aronbe~g;s 57,105 dernan~ \vas ser:ved, the.Affiant • 5. :Of fhe 42:2 hours expencl~d $ince Defciindant Aronberg's: 57. 105 demand was. served, the total time Affiant has expendeq servic'es rendered'to: date is 35.~ hour~ at the rate of 1 • • •• • - ••• - • ·- • •. - $425.Q0 perbour. Likewise, the totaitime Affiant's iaw partner, Arthur I. :Jac~6s; has expended: ' . .. . . ,.. .. ,_ •. · . ·servkes rendered to_date is 6.8 hours atthe rate of$4}5'.00 p~r hour,. 6: : Acc,bJ-di_ogiy-, s1nce-Oef~ndant Aronberg's 57.105 demand ,;vas seryed, Defendant Aronberg's counsel;JACOBS, SCHOLZ & WYLER, LLC,has rendered services in the amount - ' • of$l8)75.00, in conj,,mction;with the.defense ofthe inst~11t ac:tiQn pur!>uant to§ 57,105, Florid.a Stat~tes. See! Exhibit "C" attached liereto. 7. Affiant expects to incur an-additional 4.0.h9urs at $425.00 an· hourin preparing for and attending the hearin& ~i'n attorneys' fees: Thus; the total amount of hourly attorneys' fees_ the State Attorney is seeking is 46;2 hours for a·total of$19,975.00. Additionally, the State Attorney ' ' seeks a multiplier of 2;0, \\'hich when applied makes the grand total attorneys' fees sought herein $39;950.00; Dated tj,is 9th.day ofl\/9vember-, 202Q, 'FURTHER A_FFIANT SAYETHNOT. CA/ArapfLii15P~Ai% BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3(27/2023 4:20:48 PM I STATE OF FLORIDA - i COUNTY OF NASSAU . ... ; , : .. ■ i The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 9th day of November, 2020, by Douglas A. Wyler, Esquire, who is personally known to me and who did take an oath. -1 // J' v—-—————■— • • '■ taRanrJackson ■' Sigh^tyreofNotary Public -State of Florida ; Notai^PiibiicIstaO . Commission * GG 354841 I [/ . ' Bonded through National Notary Assn. ■ Name typed, printed or stamped ■ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1 HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 9th day ofNovember, 2020, a copy ofthe foregoing has been electronically filed with the Florida E-File Portal for e-service on all parties of record herein. JACOBS SCHOLZ & WYLER, LLC /s/Douglas A. Wyler Arthur I. Jacobs, Esq. Fla. Bar No.: 10249 Richard J. Scholz, Esq, Fla. Bar No.: 0021261 Douglas A. Wyler, Esq; Fla, Bar No.: 119979 : 961687 Gateway Blvd., Suite'201-1 Fernandina Beach, Florida 32034 (904)261-3693 (904) 261-7879 Fax Primary: jacobsscholzla'[email protected] Attorneysfor Defendant, Dave Aronberg BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3^27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY STATE OE FLbRIDA , COUNTY OF NASSAU I .. •. •.. • • . . .· • . . I . the foregoing instrum~n,t was acknowledged before me this 9_th _d~f of November, 2020, by Dou •. A. Wyle~, Esquire, who ·is personally kriown to me and:who d.id take an o;=tth. - : •. . : • .·· •. . . •. . .. "' , __ .·,, . • Name typed, pri!Jte:c! o_r,stamped :.-,:~.:-;;~ • • TARAil R, MRsoN • · ... -_·. • • '{!:~ .\ Notary Public; State of Florid1 JW.fi , ~o.rn111issi~ K G_G 35~fo . •· ; <-.. °!,:f::."f.:-' : My Comrn;E~pires Aug 17, 2023. ' ' Bond~d \~rough Na_tion,a) ~oia,fAisn. --'t·, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE . . I.HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 9th.day_ ofNoYember,'2020; a copy ot'the fore~oirig has been electror]ically filed with the Flori_qa E>Fi_l~ Port{II for ~-s~rvice on illl paities of record herein . .; ·, . ,. JACOBS SCHOLZ & WYLER, LLC /s/DouglasA. Wyfor Arthur I. Jacobs, Esq. Fla. Bar.No.: 10249 • _Richard J. :Scholz, Esq., F11,1. Bar No.: 0021261 Douglas A. Wyler, Esq, Fla_. B_ar No.: i 1,9979 : 961687 Gat_e,vay Blvd., Suite.201-1 Fernandina Beach, Flor.ida 32034 (904)261-3693 • (904) 261-7879 Fax Primary: [email protected] . .Allorneysfor Defendant, Dave Aronberg I CA/Arop~~~A~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3(27/2023 4:20:48 PM EXHlBlt“A” -.....-.EXHIBIT “A” ..1,^—2 CA/Arofl!®0£l®I BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY I CA/Arop~~iA~~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3(27/2023 4:20:48 PM Friday, September 18, 2020 at 11:09:24 Eastern Daylight Time Subject: SERVICE OF COURT DOCUMENT; CASE NO. 2019 CA-014681; GA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC V. Date: From To: DAVE ARONBERG ET aL, Monday, June 8, 2020 at 3:58:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time Douglas Wyler .. ' '[email protected]', [email protected], [email protected] [email protected], [email protected] I Attachments: 2020-06-08 Aronberg 57.-105 Demandand Motion for Attorneys' Fees.pdf Court: Case No: Plaintiff: Defendant: Title of Documents Served: Sender's Name and Telephone Number: Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Palm Beach County, Florida Case:No. 2020-CA-014681 . CA Florida Holdings, LLC Dave Aronberg •j Fla. Stat. § 57.105 Demand Letter •1 Defendant, Dave Aronberg's Motion for Attorneys' Fees Douglas Wyler (904) 261-3693 Sincerely, Doug Wyler, Esq. : Jacobs, Scholz & Wyler, LLC 1 961687 Gateway Blvd., STE 201-1 Fernandina Beach, FL 32034 904-261-3693 904-261-7879 (fax) Please.be advised that this e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential attorney-client communication Or may otherwise be privileged or confidential and are intended solely for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy or retransmit this communication but destroy it immediately. Any unauthorized dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.

Page 1 of 1 CA/Ar°PtefO.W BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY i • • •. •.. .. • . . . . ·. . . . . . . . . . . . . . "'"::::· ?:/:···;r >?< .... . ;--: Subject: •. SERVICE OF COURT DQCUMENT;'.c:ASE NO. 2019~CA-014681; CAFL\J.RIDA HOLDINGS, lLCV .. • ·DAVEARONBERG ET AL. • . • •. • . . • .• .. •• . .. · -, ·1· ·.· ·.. · .. · . '. . . . . D_at~: . ·Mond~y,'J~n~t~;-2020~~ 3:Sf58 PM Easte_rri Daylight.Ti_me • • • .·• .• -F~om: Dougias_W91~r ·. . > . . .. ' ' •· . . ,i > • •• ' • ,- ... To: '[email protected]~m', [email protected],[email protected] BoyajiariN@gtlaw:com, [email protected];'[email protected] • . • i . • • . . . . ·'<· .' · .• > . . .· .. : •. :., . . . .·, . . . . . . I : ~ttachinents: 2020-06-08·A_ronb_erg s1~1os Demand.and Motionf9r Attorneys' Fee~.pdf Court: Case No: Plaintiff: Defendc:1nt: Title of.Dbtuments Served·: Sender's Name and Telephone ·Number: Sincerely, • Cir~J;t Court ofthe Fifteenth Judi~ial Circuit, in and for P~ln, Beach County, F·lorifi . , . · • • Case;No. 2020sCA-014681 CA Florid~ Ho.ldinis, LLC Dc:1v~Aronberi ~ ~. • ... , . •j Fla. Stat. § 57.105 Demand Letter •i Defendant, Dave Aronberg's Motionfor A~orneys~ Fees- Douglas Wyler (904)261-3(:;93 Doug Wyler, Esq, . )~cqps, 5-<;f:IC?.tz lWYl.~r, lg: 96168.7 Gateway Blvd., STE :201-J Fernandina Beach, FL 320_34 904~261~3693 90.40261-7879 (fax) Please be advised that this e-mail·and any files .transmitted with it are confidentialattorney•client cor:nmuriication or may otherwise be priviieged or confidential an_ci are intended ~olely for the individual or entity to who,;:;·theyare addressed. If you are notthe intended recipient; piease do.not read, copy or re.fr~n~rnit this corrimunkation b~tdestroy :it lr::nm.ediat~ly. Any unaut~orized disse~ination~ distribution or copying ofthis communication is strictiy ~rohibited. • • • • Pc:1ge 1 of 1 CA/ArDffli~~P~Ji.i¾ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I Jacobs SchqiSz llc. • A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANYOF. PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS 1 . ’’ ATTORNEYS AT LAW " | ' JHE LAW^OFFICES OF ' . GATEWAY TO AMELIA i .- JACOpS* ASSOCIATE.5. j ' > 9©i©e7 GATEWAY BLVD., SUITE.2014 . ’ ARTHUR I. JACOBS _ * : Li-' ’ Fernandina Beach,; Florida32034 TELEPHONE (9*04) 261-3693 FAX Nd’ 004) 261-7379 RICHAR D J. SCHOLZ, P.A. RICHARD J. SCHOLZ DOUGLAS A.-WYLER, P.A. DOU GLAS A’. WYLER June 8,2020 VIA ELECTRONIC & U.S. MAIL Stephen A. Mendelsohn, Esq, GreenburgTraurig.P.A. 5100 Town Center Circle, Suite 400 Boca Raton, FL 33486 RE: CA Florida Holdings, LLC v. Daye Aronberg etal. Palm Beach County, Case No.: 2019-CA-014681 Dear Mr. Mendelsohn: As you are 'aware our firm represents the interests of Dave. Aronberg, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida, in the above referenced matter: The purpose of this letter is to demand the voluntary dismissal ofyour First Amended Complaint, (the “Complaint”),dated January 17,2020. This demand is made pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes: As you know, Section 57.105, provides: (I) Upon the court’s initiative or motion of any party; the court shall, award a reasonable attorney’s fee, including prejudgment interest, to .be paid to the prevailing party in equal amounts by the losing party and the losing party's attorney on any claim or defense at any time during a civil proceeding or action in which the court finds that the losing party or the losing party’s attorney knew or should have known that a claim or defense when initially presented to the court or at any time before trial: - ' a. Was not supported by the materia] facts necessary to establish the claim or defense; or b. Would not be supported by the application of then-existing law to those material facts. Today, Judge Marx granted, with prejudice, Defendant Aronberg's Motion to Dismiss Count II of the Plaintiffs Complaint. Pursuant to the Court's ruling, the Plaintiffs only remaining cause of action consists of Count I, for Declaratory Relief. Accordingly, we believe that the Complaint filed herein and its sole remaining Count for Declaratory Relief is not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claims asserted, and that your claims are not supported by the.application of current law to.said material facts..—....---..: --- :—-k- •- CA/Arop^jO^^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY .JA?f!-,~lL~~~. -~l~f ~lB£f,~jll' C: • • • ·. • ATTORNE:YS 'AT LAW : . : ~ . . . ~ -· .. • . . . . . . ,. • THE: LAW '-OFFICES OF GATE:WAY TO AME:LIA . JAC.OBS & ASSOCIATE:S, P.A. : ~e;ie;e7'GA~~;;,e~vo.,SUITE: 201.i FER.~'mr;<,A. ~EACH; Fu>RIDA 32Q34 • Jun·e 8, 20:20 •• VIA ELECTRONIC-& U.S. MAiL Step4e:n;A MendeJsolfn; Esq, Greenbutg'Traurig, ll.A_. ..•. · . SJOO Town' Genter Cii:de; Suite 400 Bqc~ l{aton, .fL 33486 ••. . •• TE:LE:PHONF:(~04) 2~1-3693 ·,AX NC>: (90~) 261_-787~ RE: CA Flori_da Holdings, Ll.,C "· Daye Arm1Qei-g e( ~-1. Palm Beach. County, Cas_e No.: 20i9-CAs014681 Dear Mr. Myridelsohn: RICHAR·o J._ SCHO.LZ. P.A. ~OUGLAS ..:.-WYLER, P.A. -DOUGLAS A. W)'l:--E;R As. you are ·a~vare our firm represents the interests of Dave.Ar9nberg, as State :Atto~ey o(Palm Beach County, Floricia; ih the abo\''e refei-en,c~d matter,, The purpose ofthi~ letter is to demand the voluntary dismissal of your First Amended Complaint, (ihe "Complaint"), dated January 17, 2020. This demand is made pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statu!es, As you know, Section 57 .105. provides: • . (I) Upon Jhe court's initiative or motion of any party;_ the court shall. award a reasonable attorney's fee, including prejudgment interest, to .be paid to the p:tevaifingparty in eqtiai amounts by the losing party arid the iosin~f party's attorney on any claim or defense at any time during a civil proceeding or.action in which the c:ourt. finds tlrnt the Jqsirig' part)': or tl,e losing party's aitor.ney knew or shQuld have known that a clairli.Or defense -.vhen initialiy presented to the court or at arty time· before trial: • • !.l- ; Was .not suppo_itt!d by the m?teria! f~cts necessary to es_tabJish the claim or defense; or b. Wouid not be supported by the application of then-existing law to those material facts. • • Today, Jl!dge Marx granted, with prejudice, Defendal)t Aronberg'~ Motion to ,DismissCol!nt II of the .Plaihtitrs Complaint Pursuant to the Court's·rul_ing1 the .Platr\tiff's ·only rei:naini_ng cause ofaction 'C011SiS!S of Courit I, for Declaratory Re I iel Acco'rd ingly; we ,believe thafthe' Complaint filed herein and its'.sole remaining Courit 'for Declaratory Reliefis nqt SlJPRQrted· by the ma,terial facts.necessary to •• establi_sh_t~e c:laims asserted, and that your claims _are not supported by the.application of curreiit law .to.said inater1~i facts:, ______ · .•. --·----,--~----- ---- . • - - ----- ._.-1 - -- ,- ~ .. - ... : _______ . · -- - . . . . . . t . CA/Aro-pifEi?~At%_ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3(27/2023 4:20:48 PM first and foremost, the Complaint is not supported, by the material facts necessary to establish the claims asserted because neither Defendant Aronberg, nor The Office of the State Attorney for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit is in custody or control of the 2006 grand jury materials sought therein. Simply put, the declaratory' relief sought by the Plaintiff, seeks records from my client that are impossible for him or his office to produce. Accordingly, Defendant Aronberg is not a proper party to this action because no matter what, he and his office do not have possession, custody, or control ofthe requested materials. . ; lit addition to the foregoing material facts that negate the claims asserted in the Complaint, your claims are also not supported by the application ofcurrent law.. Specifically, your action for declaratory relief fails based on the clear, unambiguous statutory language found in Section 905.27(2), Florida Statutes, which states: When such disclosure is ordered by a court pursuant to subsection (I) for use in a civil case, it may be disclosed to all parties to the case and to their attorneys and by the latter to their legal associates and employees. However, the grand jury testimony afforded such persons by the court can only he used in the defense or prosecution ofthecivil or criminal case and for no otherpurpose whatsoever. Moreover, even ifthe Plaintiff were to prevail in the declaratory’ action, Mr. Aronbergwould be unable to comply with any court order granting disclosure of the requested documents because neither Mr. Aronberg nor The Office of the State Attorney for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit have possession, custody, or control ofthe 2006 Epstein grand jury records. Based on the foregoing, if the Complaint is not dismissed within 21 days ofthe service of this' letter, the enclosed Motion for Attorney’s Fees will be filed and we will seek as sanctions, from your client and your firm, recovery of the legal expenses incurred in defending this frivolous action. Please govern yourselfaccordingly. Douglas A. Wyler, Esq. For the Firm Encl.:' Defendant's Motion for Attorneys’ Fees BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3?27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY first and foreqiost, the Complaint is not supported. by the material facts necessary- to establish the . . . .. . . . -· . . . . -· . - . . . I . . ..• claims asseri~d ,because ne_ither Defendant Aroriberg, nor The Offic~ of the Stat_e Attorney for th~ • Fifteenth ~u~Jsia,):Circtiit)i incus109y 9r cdntrpl of the 2006;gtatid jury q1aterials soug,ht therein .• Simply put, the declarator)' relief sought by the Plaintiff, seeks records from my client that are impossible for him or his office to produce. A~cording'ly, Defendant Ar9nber~is not a ptoper party to this action because no ma:tt~lwhat,he ar1dhis office do riot have possession, custody, or'controi of the requeste~ rilaterials. • • In addition to·thdoregoing materiaJ facJsJI,a~ negate the claims assertedjn the Complaint, your claims • are:alsq not supported.by .the application of current'iaZv .. Specifically, yotir\1ctfonfordeclaratofy r~li_ef . fgils b,asecf;on .the clear, u11ambiguous;statutory language found in Section 9b$.2:Z(2);flprida Statutes, • which states: • • • • • . . . When such disclosure is ordered.by a court pursuaritto subsection (i)for use in a.civil case, it may ~e disclosed to ali parties to the case and to their attome,ys and by the latter to their legaJ associ~tes and errmloyees. Hi:)wever, the'grandJiirv tesiimonv afTorded such persons by the court canonlFbe used in the.defense or p-rosecution ofthe civil or criminal case and for no otherpurpose whatsoever. • • Moreover, even if the Plaintiff were to pre~ail in the declaratory action; Mr. A~onberg would be unable to comply with any cqurt ord~r granting disCI9sure of the requesteq docume;Dts because neifhet Mt. Aronberg nor The Office of the State Attorney for the' Fifteenth Judicial Circuit have possessfon, c·ustody, or-control· of the 2006 Epstdn grand jury records. ' Based on tlle forego1~g, if the Complaint is not dismissed within 21 days of rhe service or this: letter, the enclosed Motion for Attorney's Fees will be filed and we will seek as san'ctions, from your-client and your firm, recovery of the legal exp_enses incurred in defending th.is friVolpus action. Please go\. 'em __ yourself ac~~gL ¥--'k .~r . Douglas A. Wyler; Esq. For the Firm _Encl.: Detendanfs Motion for Attorneys· Fees i CNAr~fl9ffl5?~A.1~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3(27/2023 4:20:48 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC, ’ Publisher of the PALM BEACH POST, J Plaintiff, . : v. CASENO.: 19-CA-O14681 DAVE ARONBERG, as' State Attorney of Palm.Beach County, Florida; SHARON R. ' BOCk,as Clerk arid Comptroller of Palm Beach County', Florida. ’ Defendants. DEFENDANT, DAVE ARONBERG’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES Defendant, DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida, by and through the undersigned attorneys, moves the Court, pursuant to Florida.Statutes, Section 57.105, to award'him reasonable attorneys’ fees for the defense of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, (the “Complaint”), and as grounds therefor, would show that on June 8, 2020, Plaintiff was served a copy of this Motion, together with a letter from the undersigned attorney, in accordance with subsection (4) of the above Statute, demanding dismissal of the Complaint, at least 21 days prior to the filing of this Motion. In said letter, Defendant’s attorney advised Plaintiffof the facts which establish that the; Complaint is without support of the facts or the law. WHEREFORE, Defendant, DAVE ARONBERG, as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida, respectfully requests the Court enter an Order requiring Plaintiff and Plaintiffs attorneys to pay said Defendant’s attorneys’ fees incurred herein after service of this Motion. BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3p7/20234:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY , IN THE cikcufr COURT OF THE FiFTEENTHJlJTiiCI& CIRCl.HT ,· ,, • IN AND FOR PAL~1 BEACH COUNTY, FLbRibA • • • • . .. . , • __ .:: • • . . . : .• .. ··, , . • . .- .• I CA.FLORIDA HOLDJNG,S;.-LLC, Publisher of the PALM BEACH.POST, Plaintiff, . V. _DAVE ~ONBERG; as·state Attorney of PaiipJ~~~ch C9µrify, fi()tjda;-Sl'IAR.6N R. BOCK/as: ti erk arid Comptrbil_er .of Pal!ll Beach :county: Florida. • . Qefendants. • ----'--'---------~-/ • DEFENDANT. DA VE ARONBE~G;S MOTIC>_N'FOR ~TTORNEYS' FE;ES Defendani, DkVE ARON,BE~G, as State Attorney of-Palm Beach County, Florida, _by and through ihe undersig.Qed littorneys, moves the Court, pursu~t to Florid11 Sfatt,tJes, Section 57. 105; • l • •. ' to award'him reaso'n~ble attorney_s' fees for the d~f~nse of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, .. • . (the "Comp!afnt"), a~d as grounds therefor, wouid show that on Ju~e 8, ·2020, Plaintiffwas served , - a copy of th_is Jvfotion,. together witl}a leJter. from the urn:lcr~igned ~ttorn~y, in ~ccordanc~ with subsection ( 4) of the above Statute, demanding dis.missal of the Complaint, at least _21 days prior to the filing of this.Motion. In said iener:, befendani's attorney advised Pia1ntiffofthe facts,,,.,foch cstabl{s_h tha( th~:Compla'.inf i~ without·s_upport of the facts or the law. WHEREFORE, Defehdan,i; DAVE ARONBERG, as State AriorneY of Palm Beach County, Florida, respectfully requests the Courfenter an Order requiring Plaintiff and Plaintiffs -: : • . ' attorneys fo pay ~~1ciDefendan~;s attorneys'fees ihcurredhereinafter service of this Motion. , , CA/Aro-pfL9fflj~~A9::l\¾ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3(27/2023 4:20:48 PM CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on.this,day , 2020, the foregoing was electronically filed via the Florida E-File Portal for electronic service on the parties of record, lerein. JACOBS SCHOLZ & WYLER, LLC /s/Douglas A. Wyler . . \ t ; Arthur I. Jacobs, Esquire Fla. Bar No.: 108249 Richard J. Scholz, Esquire Fla. Bar No.: 0021261 Douglas A. Wyjcr, Esquire Fla. Bar No.: 119979 961687 Gateway Blvd., Suite 201-1 Fernandina Beach, Florida 32034 (904)261-3693 (904)261-7879 J [email protected] Attorneysfor Defendant CA/Arof^fc°?l®l BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY • ••• CERTIFICATE OF SERViCE . .. I hereby certify that,on'_ihis _._ -_. -_ day . _ _ 2020, the fore,goingras ele,ctrofocally filed •• vi~ the Florida E~FilePoruu f<Jr electronic service on the parties cif_record rerein . • - - • ·: ·-; .: . : :- ... :· . . JACOBS SCHOLZ & JVYLER, LLC ,/,', .,_ :-;-i. ·.. · .. (s/IJ,Qugl[JS A. Wy!e.r. : • • Arthi.iiI.Jacobs,:Esqtlire: Fla, I3ar: No.: 1, 08,249 : '. .. Richard J. Scholz; Esquire Fla,BW: No,:,002)2'6L . Douglas A, Wyier,.Es'quire Fla. Bai-'No.:<119979: 961687 GatewiY Blvd., Suite 201-I. Ferifandina Beach,.Florida 32034 (904) 261-3693 •• (904)26F7879 . j acci bsscho lzia v,[email protected] rilcas"t. net Attotneysfor Defendant • • ··_ - ·, j CA/Ar~~P~A¥NI BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3 27/2023 4:20:48 PM EXHIBIT “B” EXHIBIT “B” CA/Arap^^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3^27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY CA/AroPfi,9E!r5P~A¥~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3~27/2023 4:20:48 PM Filing # 115383434 E-Filed 10/21/2020 04:13:35 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC, CASENO.: 50-20I9-CA-014681-XXXX-MB Publisher of THE PALMBEACHPOST. ■ DIVISION: AG :. • Plaintiff,.- \ . L . . ■ ; v. ■■ * ' . DAVE ARONBERG,as State Attorney of Palm Beach County, Florida; SHARON R. BOCK, as Clerk and Comptroller of Palm Beach County', Florida, Defendants. PLAINTIFF CA HOLDINGS, LLC’S NOTICE OF DROPPING STATE ATTORNEY, DAVE ARONBERG Plaintiff, CA HOLDINGS, LLC, pursuant to Fla. R. Civ. P. 1250(b), hereby notifies the parties that it has dropped State Attorney, Dave Aronberg from the above case. Respectfully submitted, GREENBERG TRAURIG, P A. AttorneysforCA Florida Holdings; LLC, Publisher of The Palm Beach Post Stephen A. Mendelsohn, Esq, . 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 2000 Boca Raton, Florida 33486 Telephone: (561) 955-7629 Facsimile: (561) 338-7099 - By: /s'Stephen A. Mendelsohn . STEPHEN A. MENDELSOHN Florida Bar No. 849324. ' [email protected] sm [email protected] [email protected] CA/Arop^^O^I^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY . ;, ,. .. )~i)i11g # 115383434 E-Fi\~ J0/2lf2020Q4:_13:35 P~'.{' - .. . ... • .... . '.·"'··.· . .. . ..... • CA FLORIDA-HOLDINGS, tic, . Publisher of THE.PALM BEACHPOST .• .. . .. ,• Plai11tiff, .. : •. · V. DAVEARbNBERd, as Stat~ A:ttdiney of Paim Beach C:ounty, Florida;·SHARON R,. BOCK, ·as C,!erk aqci Cqmpt~oll~r ~f Palin Beach County, Floridli, , • • Defendants. . . . · .... •. ·. . . . • . j ::·,:, IN THE ClRCuiT COURT!OPTHE fIFT,EENJl,-I. JLJPICIAL:CIBCUIT IN AND • FOR PALM 8,EACHCOID,-iTY, FLORII)A CASENo.; 5Q:2oi9-CA-01~681~xxxx-MB , ·, • DIVISION;, A,G - PLAJNTIFf CA HOLDINGS., LLC'S , NOTICE.OFDROPPL~G STATE ATTORNEY. DAVE ARONBERG' • Plai~tiff; CA HOLmNGS, LLC::, pursuantt~ Fl~: R. ~iv: P ~ I 250{b), hereby nptifies the parties that it has dropped State Attorney, Dave AronQerJ from ihe above case, Respectful I}' submitted, GREENBERGTRAURIG; P:A. Auorneys jorCA Floridc;i Holdiiigs;, LLC, Publisher of The PalmJ3ea_cJi Post Stephen .A, Me.ndeisohnJ:sq, . , 40 I East: Las Olas Boulevard Suite. 2000 Boe; RatonJlorida 33486 - • • • • - -• Telephone: (561) 955-7~29 Facsimile: (561) 3.38-?099 • By: IVSiephei1 A. Mendelsohn STEPHEN A. MENOELS_OHN Florida Bar No. 849324. mend~lsohnstwl!tla\\:_com sm i1hlfll:gtl:1w.com FLServiccii11gtlaw.com CA/Arof,lfLSfflj~~A.1:M BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3(27/2023 4:20:48 PM By: Zs/ MichaelJ (jrveiel . * MICHAEL J GRYG1EL | : (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) _ | 54 State. St., 6th Floor ■ Albany, New York 12207.. Telephone: (518)689-1400 " Facsimile: (518) 689-1499 ' - . By: /s/ Nina D. Bovaiian ■-_ ’ ' N1NAD. BOYAJ1AN : (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) 1840 Century Park East, Suite -1900 Los Angeles California 90067. Telephone:'(310) 586-7700 Facsimile: (310) 586-7800 [email protected] riveraal@gtlaw:cbrn CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE THEREBY CERTIFY that on this 21s' day of October, 2020, a true and correct copy of the- foregoing has been filed with the Clerk of the Court using theState of Florida e-filjng system, which will send a hotice ofelectronic service for all. parties of record herein /s/Stephen A. Mendelsohn STEPHEN A. MENDELSOHN ACTIVE 53317341v1 CA/Arop^OJg.% BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3p7/20234:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY By: Isl Michael J.Grygiel. MIC:flf\EL T GR.XQI_EL (Ad.rnitted'Pro Hac'Vice) 5.4 St~te. St, 6th Flo~r • · · · Albany, New YQrk i'.2207 .. • TeI1pli6ne: ( 518)689.~ 1400 • ~xt:ri~t£irir!Ja:~~~~l4~ 9 . ·- -. - ... ,._ . , ~ ~ 13y: . /~/ Nin~D. Bo'vaiidn • Nfi'J;,\ D. BQYAJIAN •• (Adrnltteo Pro f[a6 Vii:;e) . 1840 ~eniury Park East; ,Sllite i 9,00 . Los Angeles Callfornia-90067 Telephone:· (310) s'.s~~1100 Facsimile: _(310) 586-7800. bovajiann@irtla\v.com • riv"etaal/@gtiaW:cbhl .·- . CERTIFICATEOF SERVICE- IHEREBY::<:;ERTIFY that on this 21 st day.ofQcfober, 2020, a true 3:nd correct ~opyofthc· foregoing has been tiled· ~•ith the Clerk of the tourt u_iing the State of Florida e-filjng system, which will s·end a notice of electr<?nic service for all parties of record herein ls/SlephenA. Mendelsohn • STEPHEN A>MENDELSOHN ACTIVE 53317341v1 2 CA/AroPfL1!i~P~A¥~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3~27/2023 4:20:48 PM EXHIBIT “C” I EXHIBIT“C” CA/Arofte?)PPXl7I^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY •• EXHIBIT "C'' CA/ArcpJl~~P~A¥M BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 31/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I Jacobs Scholz & Wyler, LLC z : 961687 Gateway Blvd., Suite 2011, Fernandina Beach, FL 32034 United States 904-261-3693 Jacobs Scholz & Wyler, LLC Dave Aronberg Balance $32,440.00 Invoice# 00307 Invoice Date November 6, 2020 Payment Terms Due Date Aronberg (SAO15) adv. CA FIorida Holdings, LLC Time Entries Date EE • Activity Description ' Rate Hours Urie Total 11/26'2019 .DW . Review Initial review'of summons and complaint. $425.00 1.5 $637.50 11/26/2019 pw Review Reviewed motion for pro hac vice and Judge Hafele'order granting I ■ . $425.00 0.2 $85.00 11/26/2019 pw Teleconference Teleconference w/ Client, re: response to lawsuit $425.00 ‘ 0.5. $212.50 11/26/2019 pw Draft Drafted engagement letter and sent to client $425.00 0.3: : $127.50 11/26/2019 DW Review Reviewed 15th circuit local rilles :$425.00, 1.0. $425.00. 11/26/2019' AU Review Initial,review of complaint $475.00 1.0; $475.00 11/26/2019 AU Meeting Meeting w/ DAW to discuss lawsuit and strategy ‘ $475.00 0.5' " - $237.50 11/26/2019 DW Meeting Meeting w/ AU to discuss lawsuit and strategy ■ $425.00 0.5 $212.50 11/26/2019 AU Teleconference Teleconference w/.Client, re: resporiseto lawsuit $475.00 0 5 $237.50 .12/02/2019 DW Research & Preparation Research and prep'for Motion to dismiss $425.00 20 $850.00 12/02/2019 DW Draft 1st Draft motion to dismiss . $425.00 1.0 $425.00 12/02'2019 DW Teleconference teleconference w/ Client, re: draft motion to dismiss: $425 00 0.5 $212.50 12/02/2019 AU Review Reviewed 1st Draft MTDjsmiss $475.00 0.3 $142.50 12/02/2019 . AU Teleconference Teleconference w/ client, rerdfaft motion to dismiss $475.00 0.5 $237.50 12/03/2019 AU Meeting Meeting ,w/ DAW, re: motion'to dismiss $475.00 0.2 $95.00 12/03/2019 DW Meeting_, Metric) __: $425.00 0.2 -. $85.00 12/06/2019 , DW Draft Completed fihai'draft'of motion to dismiss; filed ,with Court ' , ■ATI . $425.00 ■ 0.7 $297.50 12/06/2019 ,dw’ Teleconference Spoke w/client, re: final draft of motion to dismiss $425.00 05 $212.50 CA/Arop^g^l^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY .. :~:: ~- _.· - • J~cot>s--~cfi~1f ~ ·W:vi~r; LL<; · ; ; : 961687 Gateway81vd;;Suite20ll i Fernandina Beach,"Fl/32034_ • •• Urihe'd:States • • •. . .. · . ·. • • 904~26h3693 ---· • ... • .. · .• :' O'iiveA(o11t>e:rg. Balaifo~ : · $3~,44-(}Q() • :~;ciJA::~at{ · ~~~!~oe, s, 2020 Payment Terms· Oue:D~te. ~rc,nberg. (SA015) adv: CA, Florida Holdir:igs, '~LC EE •• •• ' Activity • 11/26i2019 DW • Review 11/26/2(if9 DW Review 11/26/~019 pw : 11/26i2019 DW 1)/26/2019 DW 11/26/2019' AIJ 11126I2of9 AIJ 11/26/201!:( .ow 11i26i2019 'Aij 12/021?019 DW 12/02/2019 DW 12i0212019 DW 12/0212019 Al.,1 12/021201. 9 . AIJ 12.143120_19 • AIJ 12/06/20 i 9 , :o,w Teleconference Draft Re~iew ReView r..1eefing Meeti_ng Teleconference R_esearc~ & Preparation Draft Telecopfere,rice_ f3eview • Teleconference Description • • 'ln_itial review·oi ~uminons· and ~dmplairit, Reviewed motion fo(pr~ hac ·vice and judge Haf~le' orde_r granting Tel_econterence wiClient, re·: response tq lawsuit Drafted ~ngagement letter a[\~ sent to clienf . ....... . . ., Reviewed 15th circuii lo.cal rules .iriftial ·ievie~ of complaint Meeiirig.w/.DAWto dis;::uss·lawsuii ~nd strategy Me~ting w/ AiJto di~cuss iaws~it :an~ ~trategy 1'.e_leconlerence w(CHeni, re: resporise·to lawsuit . : . Research and prep'JorMoiion to dismiss .1st Draft motloii'to dismiss . Teleconference wt Clieni, re: qratt motion_ to dism[ss Reviewed 1 st'Draft MT.Dismiss •• . .- :,--- .. - . - . J~i~~~ference w~ client, re:-draft ~otion to dismiss Co~pleted fihai'd;aft-•of inoil~n to di~miss;•filed,with cbtirt ' • - · · --- • • - • Rate $425.00 $425.00 $425:00 •--,;; •$425,00 _ _,. l .. :, . $4f,OO: ' -~ . L[rie Totiil 1.5 $637:50_ 0.2 $85.00 0.5, $212:50 -·.:·;.- 0.3: $Jp.so 1.0 $425.00_ 1.0: $475.00 -0:5 $237.50 2,0 $85,0.00 1.0 $425.00 g.5. $2_12;so 0.3 $142,50 · 0:5 $237.50 - - 0,2 $95.00 ---, • 0.7 CA/Ai'of}~?9,W~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 31/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I 12/06/2019 . bw Teleconference Spoke with Clerk’s attorney, retresppnse ;.. L . $425.00 2 9:5 ; $212.50 12/66/2019 "• AU Review ■ ' Reviewed final draft M1 Dismiss / $475.00, . 7- 0:2 ...’ $95.00 12'06/2019 ■ AU Review Reviewed Clerk's MTDismiss $475.00 A2. $95.00 12'13/2019 •• , -rtv, >. . . DW Review Reviewed Clerk's Motion to Dismiss • $465.00 0.5 $212.50 61716/2020 . <- ... DVV Review Reviewed Order Setting Hearing oh Defendants' MTDismiss ■ ■ J - ' $425.00 o.1; $42.50 01/16/2020 DW . Review Reviewed motion for pro hac vice . $4’2'5.00 , 0.1 ' $42.50 01/17/2666 dw Review Reviewed Pl's Amended Complaint • k . . .- $425.00 ■ - TO- $425.00 01/17/2020 DW Teleconference Spbke.with client, re: Amended Complaint : $425.00 0.5 $212.50 01/17/2020 .. DW Review Reviewed Pl's.notice of fiiing : ' $425.00 0.1, .■ $42.50 01/20/2020 AU Review .. Reviewed Pl's.Am. Compl $475,00 0,3 $142.50 01/21/2020 bw Review Reviewed Judge Marx's Order-Cancelling MTDismissHearing “$465:06 0.1 $42.50 01/21/2020 DW , Review Reviewed Pl's Objection to Defendants' MTDismiss $425.00 0-2 ■ $85.00 01/21/2020 ‘dw Teleconference Spoke with client, re: Amended complaint $425.00 .0.5 $212.50 01/21/2020 AU Meeting- Meeting w/ DAW, re: response Ip,Am. Compl, $475.00 0.2? :$95/00 01/21/2020 DW Meeting Meeting w/AU, re: response to’Am.’Compl. $425.00 9.2. $85.00 01/22/2020 DW Review Reviewed Order granting pro hac vice admission ' $425:00 6,1 $42.50 01/22/2020 DW Research & Draft : Researched and drafted response to Amended Complaint ... $425:00 1.0 $425.00 01/23/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke with Clerk’s attorney, re: response to amended complaint $425.00 02 $85.00 01/24/2020. DW Various Completed Answer/MTDismiss Amended Complaint; filed with Court; sent copy to Client $425.00 TO $425.00 01/24/2020 DW Draft Drafted and filed Notice of Unavailability $425.00 6.4 $170.00 01/24/2020 AU Review Reviewed final Answer/MTDismiss $475.00 0:2 $95.66 01/27/2020 DW . Review Reviewed.Clerk's Answer/MTDismiss $425,00 0,3 $127.50 02/03/2020 DW . Review Reviewed Order setting hearing oh Defs' MTDismiss $425.00 0,1 $42.50 02/03/2020 DW - Teleconference Spoke w/ client, re: order setting MTDismiss hearing for March 24, 2020 $425.00 0,5 $212.50 03/13/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pl's Opposition to Aronberg MTDismiss & Clerk's MTDismiss $425.00 1.;5 $637.50 03/13/2020 AU Review Reviewed Pl's Opposition to Aronberg MTDismiss & Clerk's MTDismiss $475.00 0:7 $332.50 03/18/2020 DW Teleconference Reviewed email from Pl's counsel, re: motion to continue hearing’ ... $425 00 0:1 $42.50 03/18/2020: bw Review Reviewed Pl's unopposed motion for continuance $425,00 01 $42.50 03/18/2020 DW E-mail EmailSvwAGIerk's counsel, re: Pl's requestto continue hearing $425.00 0.2 $85.00 03/19/2020 DVV E-mail Reviewed email from PI, re: agreed order & responded : $4,25.00 0;i: ,. $42.50 03/20/2020 DW Review Reviewed Court's, agreed order continuing hearing $425.00 0,1 ’.$42:50 CA/Arop^O^® BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY ' .. - ·. .12,'.061?01. 9 AIJ Review ·r·· 12/0612019 AU Revie:,v 12/13/2019 ., :<.:. ow • i=levie~: 'of/1612020 D.W Revie.w ,·, 01/16/?020 oW· Rev/ew 01/20/20?0. AIJ Review, 01i21/?020, bw Review,· 011,2112020 ow R~view 01i21/2020 'ow Teleconference 01/21/20~0 AIJ Meeting· 01i21/2620 DW Meeting 01}22/2029 DW Revie_y., 0112212020 DW. Research & Draft 01/23/2020 DW Te.leconference 0·1124i2020. DW Various o 1/24/2020 ow: • ·oraft OJ/24/2020 AIJ. Review 01/27/2020 DW Reyie\V 02/03/2020 DW • Review Q?f.03/2029 DI/if Teleconfere.nce 03/13/2020 DW Review 03/13/2020 .AIJ Review 03/18/2020 DW Teleconference 03/1Bi2020: DW Review 03/18/2020• DW E:mail 03/19/2020. DW E:mail 03/20/_2,020' Q~ R_eview Reviewed Cltirk's Mi1ihn t~ Dis~iss ..--,;,. - ..... ;- .;.: Re~ieviedbrder Settf~gHeaiihg 6riDeieridants' MTDismiss • ' • . -:-.··. Reviewed motion for pro.hac vice •. • .,,.,. ·~ • ·-..•. ! ·:,. • • , _. •• ,... . -· Reviewed Pl's'Am. C~mpl . . .. : ~ . _:;.,., . . . Revi~weii' J.idge iviah<'s Ordei-- Cantellirig MTIJiSO}iSS \-f eqring Spoke with client,\e: ,'\mended ¢inplaint Me1ting ·'If, DAVI/; re: respi:i~s~ lo Ain. Compi. . '·-· ..• · .. ··, --- .• - . ____ ;.:.. Meeting:~/AIJ, re: 'response to' Am.' Comp!. ~eyie:,y~~JOrder granting i:iro ha~vice aqmjssio11 Re~earbh·e.d and drafted response lo Amended CbmRIJ!irit • Spoke wiih Clerk's attorney, re: response to amended complaint' CompletedA[ls~er/MTDismiss Amended Co~plalnt; filed with C,ourt; s'eni copy to Client Dratted and file.cf Notice of Unavai!abiiity Reviewed finai AnsweitMTDismiss Re',fiewed Clerk's Answer/MTC>,smiss Reviewed Orde.r setting n~aring on bets' M;l'Dismiss •• f,'pok~ _wt client, re:,order~etting MTDismiss he<!rir'lg for fylarch 24,. 2020 Revie~ied Pl's Opposition to Aronberg MTDismiss & Glerk's MTDismiss .Reviewed ~rs Opposition to Aronberg MT Dismiss & Clerk's MTDi.smiss 'Reviewed ·e·mail. from Pl;s counsel, re: rTiotf9n io continue hearing Review.ed Pl's unopposed motion for continuance ... , •-. ·' • . Emails,~/:Cl_e,:k's counsel, re: Pl's requestt.o . coniinue hearing ••• ---~--.,-.- ·:. : . f'!e_v1ew,ec:l.1;miail from Pl, re: agree~'order·& r~spO~!!d' I $425.00 ·--:c· ., . ,,·$42s:6o • .. :: __ -l·. $425.00: ,. $4~5:oo $425,00 $475.00 •. ~-: $425:00 $425.00 $425.00 $425.00 $4,75:00 $425.00 $475.00 I $425.00 S425))0 ;-... '$425.00 '· j'. ,, 0.,2 • • $95.00 _$4?.50 0,2 · ,0.5 $212:50 0.2 0.2 $85:oo ·0 .. 1 1.0 0:2 $85COO '1;0 $425.00 0.4 s179;00 ~n ---~-- $95.00 0:3 $127.50 0.1 $42.50 O.~ $212.50 LS $637.50 0;7 ,$332.50 0:1 $42;50 p:i $42:SO 0,2 ·$85.00 0:1· $42,50 ·p;_1 $42:50 CA/Arcp~?iJ\9!.M BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I ' 04/21/2020 ' DW Review ’ V . ? .Reviewed order'rescheduling hearing on Defs’. MTDismiss ' -a ; ■ 25:d0 '. 0.1 ' ' S42.50 04/21/2020 DW Teleconference Sppke w/ client, re: order rescheduling MTDismiss hearing for June 3,'2020 ■ i - . $425:00 i. • 0.3 $127.50 04/21/2020 : Au Review Reviewed Order rescheduling MTDismiss hearing $475.00 0.1 ' $47.50 ' 05/22/2020 ~ pw Review, Reviewed order setting Zoom hearing, re: ' MTDismiss . $425.00 0t $42,50 05/22/2020 DW Teleconference , Spoke'w/client, re: hearing will be via Zoom ’ $425.00 0:2 $85.66 05/27/2020 DW . ' Review Reviewed Clerk's filing:.change of atty of record . S425.00 \ ■ 0:i ; . $42.50 05/27/2020 , DW /teleconference Spoke with Clerk’s new counsel, Nicole Fingerhut '■S425.00 6.2 $85:00 05/28/2020 DW E-mail /Reviewed PCs email, re; cases and authorities for MTDismiss hearing; responded . - . $425.00 0.J $42.50 05/29/2020 ; pw : Preparation Began oral argument prep for 6/8 MTDismiss hearing ’'E . $425.00 1.0 $425.00 06/01/2020 : DW . E-mail 'Reviewed email from Judge,Marx's JA and responded' ■ $425.00 0.1 ' $42.50 06/02/2020 DW ' Various Reviewed Pl's 500+ page binder, re: MTDismiss prepped for hearing $425.00 3.6 $1,275.00 06/02/2020 .DW E-mail Drafted and.sent email to client, re: MTD hearing tomorrow ‘ ... $425.00 0.1 $42.50 06/03/2020 DW Attend Hearing Prepped for and attended MTDismiss:hearing via Zoom $425.00. 1.5 $637.50 06/03/2020 ‘ DW Teleconference Spoke w/ Client, re: debrief MTpi.smiss hearing $425.00 0.5 ' .$212.50 06/03/2020 pw E-mail Emailed courtesy copies of Aronberg’s Answer arid MTDismiss to.Judge Marx $425.00 0,1 $42.50 06/03/2020 DW - E-maH Reviewed respbrise'frbm Client and/eplied $425.00 or .$42:50. 06,'03/2020 AU . Attend Hearing Attended MTDismiss hearing via‘Zppm $475.00. 1.0 $475.00 06/03/2020 AU Review Reviewed order granting MTDismiss w/ prejudice $475,00 0.3 $142.50 06/08/2020 DW Review Reviewed Court's Order Granting Defendants MTDismiss Count II w/ Prejudice $425.00 0.5 $212.50 06/08/2020 pw Various Shared order w/ Clientarid spoke w/, re::result and. plan gping;fprward, re:'57.105 • $4.25.00 0.5 $212.50 06/08/2020 DW Various: Researched^ 57,105 Fla. Stat; drafted 57.105 demand letter and.proposed motion for attorneys' fees/sanctidns; Served Pl's counsel with demand letter and proposed motion. $4'25.00 2.0 $850.00 06/08/2020 AU Meeting Meeting w/ DAW, re: Order & 57.105 . $475.00 0.3 $142:50 06/08/2020 pw Meeting Meeting w/AU, re: Order & 57.105 $425.00 : 0.3 . $127 50 06/08/2020 AU Review Reviewed 57.105 demand and proposed, motion for sanction $475.00 ' 02 $95:00, 06/10/2020 DW Various. Reviewed notice of change of attorney, re: Clerk; . called and spoke w/ new counsel Cyrithia Guerra , $425.00 03 ' $127,50 06/23/2020 ‘ pw Various Reviewed Pl’s letter refusing to voluntarily dismiss: amended.complaint despite 57.105 demand;'called and spoke w/ client, re: Pl's refusal & next steps $425.00. 10 $425.00 I BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY -A~••--... --••--- 04r.fa;2020 ow Teieconference 0441,2026 .. ALI Fie\iieW .. 05/221?0,20 oi;:v: Reyiew • 05i2212020 ·9~ Teiec~rife~ence •; •os12i1g920 ow j;'lev[e\•i ·:,;.-. os1fri2020 • ow . J elec;onf~tence ·051ja12026 ow E-mail 05/29/2020. <pw Pr~paration 06/01/202.0 ow E-mail .. 0610212020 ow Various 06/02/~0,20 J?"" E-iri~il 06/03/2020 ow Attend Hearing 06/03i2020 ow Tele~nference 06i()3/2020 .. ow E-mail 06/03/2020 •• ow E~mail :06/03/2020 AIJ Attend Hearing 06/03/2020 Afr Reyie'." ;06/08/2020 ow Rev,iew ,06l9~2029 _DW Various 06/08/2020 ow Various 06lo8i2020 AIJ 'Meeting ·- 06(08/2020 _DV';l Meeting osioa,2020 AIJ 'Review 06/10/2020' DIN VariOLJS. •.. :/ Jlevieyved_ order'r~~checjuli,ri?/heiiring ori Defs'. ·: MTDisrni;s • ' : ', . ·,~::,,' ' ,, ·. ,, $p¢'kew/ clie11t, re: bip~~·;.e;chidulirig MTDi;miss hearing ior Ju~e':i,·2020 ' • •• -· ." .. - .·•;·- •. 7':. -,_ - Reviewed Order rescheduling MTDisriiids hearing . • .:.·· .•. -- . . ~ ... _. -.- - : . ,: ·_. ..... - Reviewed'order setting Z6i:im heai-irig, re' MTDi\>llliSS, Re~iev.ied Cl~rk'~ fil[ng:,change of att/9{recci~d I ':•.>•,•,: ' .. ·; - ,•<.. -..; .• ,, • •··• •• ·.• 'ReJiewed Pl;s e,r;ail, re: case; and a~th~rities for )JtTDismiss hearing; re;po-nded • • • B~gan qral {l.rgumerit piep for 6/8 MTDismiss hearing • • • ·i=!e.vf~~d, email from JGdQ(¥a.rx's.JA and re~~,n~ed'_ • • • • • ,Rey·i~ed'Pl's 500+ page bipder, re: MTDismi~s & prepped i9r hear/ng • • Drafted and:sent email to djent, re: MTD hearing tomorrow 'i>repped tor and attended MTDismiss hearing via Zoom· Sp~ke·w/Cljeni, re: debrie.f MTD1.s~iss hearing. Einfe,llE!d_courtesy copies ofAronberg'sA~\ver arid MTOisr'iliss to Judge Ma~ • -•h-• • • •, • Reviewed respon:se'froni ·clieni andorepiied -· •• ,v •• , ,, . Ait~nded. MTDismiss hearing .via,zoon, : . . . . . . . . ~ . . ... , i=i'eviewed ri-rder granting MTDismiss W/ prejudice , • :-: , • • • • • < ~ - - • .. • • Re_viewed Court's Order Granting Defendants MTp(smiss Courit II w/Prejudice Shated 6rderi;v/ Cllent'a~-d ipoke WI, re: result arid plar1g9ing:forwo!rd,·re/~7, 105 • ResE!~rc./,~d,§ 57.,fo5 Fla: Siat., d_ra{teq 57.105 de111and'letteraii,i(propcis~d rhoiio[l loi attorriE!ys' •• fees/sanctions; Served Pl's counsel with ·demand :1eiter and prciposed:moti6n, • • Meeting w(DAW, re:.Qrder &,57,105 -: _..,.,. Meeiing w{AI~, re: Order, & 57.105 .· Reviewed 5 {{o5 demand. ~ncl ;roposed motion /or . ~:incp_C>fl • • • • • ' • ' • i . $425:00 • .{, $425:<)0 'f $425,00 $425.00 $425,00 $425.00 $4,25,00 $425,00, $4_25,00 $425.00 ' • $4,75.00 $4]5.bd. $4J~'.00 $425:oo • 0:1. 0,3 <ll ,1,0 0,1 3,0 0.1 1.5 0.5 0,1 0,1' 1.0 0,3: . ,:_, 0.5 2.0 0,3 0,2, •. 0.3 $127.,50 $42.50 _· -· . ·. $425:00 : ~ _. . $42,50 $1,275i10 $42.50 $637.50 ,$2J2.50 $42,50 $142,50 $212:so $850,00 $142:56 $127,.50 $95:oo • $127,50 < -. ,_ Reviewed notice of chaflge of attorney, re; Clerk; c~iied and spoke iit'n-~\V giufisel.Cyrithia Guerra l===::a:::::;::;;*==:J::=======1-===========·==~·=·==:::::::;;:::;;;:::::;::;:::::=::J.::=:,::;::===F~====l=====::,:.I·------·-·· ReJi~wedPl's l~tt~r reiu-sing to v6i~nfariiy dis~iss: • arrt~nd&t co~iiaint <:!~spit~ '57, 1:01f ci~n'i-~~d; (:alied and spoke wi client, re: Pl's refusal'& riex(iteps • 06/23/2020 ow .Various ··-·- -..,_. ' .. I . $425.00 ! ' . $425,00 . ·. . . . . ': ~- ~ -- . ;:_ . - . CA/Arop~~i1e?~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I 06/23)20'20 pw, E-mail ' ■ Sent clientropy of Pl’s letter refusing to dismiss complaint'. ' ... $4 • >5.00 0.1 .. $42.50 06/23/2020 AIJ Review Reviewed Pl’s letter refusing"to dismiss Count l/Am. Compl. . ■ ... 1 ... $475.00 0:1 $47.50 07/01/2020 “ DW , Various ■Spoke w/ client, .re/filihg of. 57.T05‘motidri for fees/sanctions"; filed motionfor attorneys’ fees based on Pl's failure to voluntarily dismiss amended .complaint count ;1 • 1 ' $425:00 0:5 $212.50 07/02'2020 bw E-mail Email to client, re/affidavit anti summaryjudgment $425.00 i f S42.50 07/03'2020 ; pw . Teleconference ■Discussed w/ Clieritdrafting/andfijirig Motion for Summary Judgment,and MSJ evidence:. $425.00 *'**••• , $297.50 07/08/2020 ' AIJ Teleconference Discussed w/ Client drafting and filing Motion for Summary.Judgment arid MSJ evidence $475,00 0.7 $332.50 07/10/2020 ,DW Draft' Created 1st draft of Aronberg Affidavit;.shared w/ client. $425.00 CO; $425.00 07/10/2020 AIJ Various Reviewed draft affidavit and discussed, w/ DAW $475.00 0:3" $142.50 07/10/2020 DW Meeting Discusseddraft affidavitw/AIJ $425.00 0,2 $85.00 07/13/2020 DW Review. Reviewed Pl’s Request to Produce, re: Clerk $425.00 "0.1 $42.50 07/13/2020 pw Teleconference Spoke w/ Clerk’s counsel: re: Request to Produce $425.00 02 $85.00 07/27/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pi’s Amended Request to Produce, re: Clerk: ■ $425.00 0:1 $42.50 07/27/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ Clerk's cotihsel, re: Amended Request to Produce ■ $425.00 o.i $42.50 .07/28/2020 DW Draft Revised Aronberg'affidavit $425.00 0.5 $212.50: 07/29/2020 DW Draft Finalized Aronberg Affidavit and sent,to client $425.00 0.5 $212.50 07/29/2020 DW Research & Preparation Research arid prep, for Motion for Summary Judgment :. $425,00 1.0 $425.00 07/30/2020 DW Various Received executed Aronberg Affidavit $425.00 0.1 $42.50 07/30/2020 . . DW Draft Began drafting Motion for Summary Judgment $425.00 -2.0 $850:00, 08'05'2020 DW Draft Continued drafting Motion for Summary Judgment $425.00 1.0 $425.00 08'07/2020 DW /Review Reviewed email from Plaintiff attempting to set hearing on 57.105 motion for fees/sanctions $425'00 0.1 $42.50 08/10/2020 DW E-mail Sent responsive email to Pi's counsel $425,00 0.1 $42.50 08/17/2020 DW Meeting Discussed draft MSJ w/ AIJ $425.00 0:2 $85.00 08/17/2020 AIJ Various Reviewed draft MSJ and met w/ DAW to discuss $475.00 0.5 $237.50 08/18/2020 ' DW Draft; Finalized Motion for Summary Judgment: filed w/ court along with Aronberg affidavit $425.00 2.0 $850:00 08/27/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ Clerk's counsel, re: request to produce $425.00 0:1 . $42.50 09/01/2020, DW Various Reviewed Pl's email and accepted conference call invite for 9/2/20 $425.00 i 0.1 $42.50, 09/02/2020 DW Review Reviewed Clerk's response to request for production ---■-—r— ■;i. ■ $425.00 ..•h ' 0,2 $85.00 09/02/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ Pl's counsel, re: dispute as to whether MSJ should be heard before 57.105 fee motion or vis versa.- call was unsuccessful $425.00 ' 1 ' 0.5 $212.50 CA/Aroffi®Q?® BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3.27 2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY - . • .. ~·. '; . .,,... - pw .\, E0mail 0612312029 .. 06!?,312020 . AIJ Review 07i01/2020 - DW Variqus 07!921?020 'oW E,f!1aH ~ ';: ·.· ; ,_·..:., 07/08/2020 ow Teleconference 07/08(2020 AIJ Teleconference 07/10/2020 DW Ora.it O?i.10/2020 AIJ V~ribu~- 07/10/2020 'DW _Meeting .. 07/13/2020· •• DW Revi~w- 07/13(2020 _Ql/v Teleponferer:!_Ge 07l2?1202q DvV Revievv 07/27/202.0 DW Telec_onference. .07/28/2020 DW Draft 07/29/2020 DW Draft_ 07/29/2020 DV,,, Rese;itch & Prepara:tjon 0?/30/2020 DW Various 07/30/2020 ow Draft 08/05/2020 DW -Draft 0_8/07/2020 DW :Review 08/10/2020 DW E0riiail 08(17/2020 D_W Meeting 08/17/2_020 AIJ Various 08/18/20gO DW Dfaft' 08i27/2020 bw Teieconfer.ence- oilio 112620, DW ita:rious 09/02/2020 DW Review ·-··-- -·-----· --···--··-···-·-·---·----- 09/02/2020 ·ow_ Teleccmierence Sentctie!it copy cif Pfs letter refusing to dismiss ' tompi°~i~( ' • • • ' • : - • - - •• • ' - Revi~~~d .pi•; ieher~~fu~ing"to dismi~s-Count I/Am,. ~m.Ri': : . •· • , ,.··: - • • • :spoke w/ ciie(lt_Je:}Wrig_9f ~7.105 nioti9r{lor fees/sanctions; filed m6iionJor attorneys' fees based on Pl;~,f~ililre t6"volunt~iily dism'iss • 'llcme~dJd:~_mplai~i' ca,u_n,i'.i -~ • •• • • Email i~ ~lienl.re: affidavit and suir)nia:ryjudgrilent . . .., ... ~·. :. .. : . . ·_ . ' .. ,._ . . . , - ~-- :Q[scuss~ w/ Clie~fd,rafti_ng:ar'i,ci°filing fy1oti~n for • Su~~:.i.ry ~9dg'm~nt.an,d MsJ evi#ence: : • _ Disc:ussed w/Clieht drafting:and.filing-Motion tor ~~ni~11ry_J_udgmen(arid MSJ evidenc(:1. • Cr1,~ted 1st.draft of Aronberg .A,ffidavif;.shared w/ di~'rit .• • • • •• Reviewed draft affidavit and dlscussed wi DAW • . . .. •• Discussed 0draft alfidavit.~/AIJ Re~iewed PJ's Ameiitjed Requesttci Produce, re: Clerk • s~·oke_w/ Clerk's coJnsel, ·re: Amended Request to Prod_u~ fl evised Aronberg'?ffidai.iit Finalized Aronb~rg Affidavit and s_eni,io client Reseaich arid prep for'Motioi'l for Summary Judgnint • R~c::eived executed /lronberg _Affidavit Began dra~ing tylotionf()r Sumniary j~dgment Qontimi~ddraftinQ ~otion for Summary Judgment Revieweci'-email from Plaintiff attempting to set hearing ori 57. i 05 r:not\on for feesfsarictio_ns •• • '• • • r • •• • Se,nt respon~ive:erri~1nq Pi's cq_unsei( Discussed dr~ft M.SJ wi AIJ :Reviewed d(att MSJ and met wi DAW to discuss ,.C'. • • • -•. ••-• ._, • • r • • '~" • •• • • •• •• '•• • - •• :Ffri~ize~ Motion for Suminary.Ju_dgme~t; iiied wi cou~ along. v,,,ith Aron berg a_ffidavit ·spoke w/ Clern~s counsel, r~: request to_ pr~duce Revie~ed _Pl's ernail ,and'atcepied conference call invite /or 912120 • • • Reviewed CJ~ili:;:response to r.eciuest for .j:lroduc!Jcin . . • Spcike;wi .Pl's counsel, re': dispuii·a:s to i,vhether MSJ should be heard b~f~ie57. 105 fee mo'tjonor vis versa.' ~II was _u~s.uccessful. .... L· .. $425.00 t . ... I ... $475.00 1 I $425.00 ;, (. . ·j ,· $425.00 .-•t·.-,. s,i7s:oo -~ i • $425.00 $425.QO .$425:00 $425.ciO $425.00 $425:cio $425.00 $425.00. • • I • • • $425.00 $425:00 $425:oo $425.00 $4?5,00 ~475.00 $425:oo $425.00 $4}5.00 I • I $425.00 .-r -'. 1. $425.00 . I . 0. t $4250 0:1 $47.50 0:5 $212.50 0:1' $42.50 ;0:7 $297.50 0.7 $332.50 1_,o '. $425.00 o::f s112.so 0.2 $85.00 0.1 $42,50 Q,2 $85.00 0,1 $42,50 o.i $42.50 0.5 $212.50 0.5 $212,50 1.0 ~5425:00 0.1 $4250 ·2.0 $850,00 ... 1.0 $425'.00 ·oc1 $42.50 0.1 542_:50 9:2 $85.00 0.5 l2,3?.50 2.0 $850,00 0:1 $42.50 0.1 $42.50,,, ... -0,2 __ $85.00 0.5 $212.50 CA/Arop1ft:ffl5?ih1!~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3r27/2023 4:20:48 PM 09/02/2020 ’ , AU 7 Meeting. . - Discussedjw/.DAW.pho^ catw/ Pl's counsel ' / $475.00 . 7 .' 0.2 7 $95.00 09/02/2020 / DW. . Meeting- < Discussed w/Au phone call wZ.prs;cpurisel A : $425:oo T / ■■ 0.2 : $85.00 09/16/2020 ' DW E-mail, Reviewed email from Pl's counsel requested Aronberg to withdraw sanctions motion w/b prejudice.. . ,. ' $4^25.00 0.1 $42,50' 09/17/2020 DW Meeting Discussed w/ AU filing motion for CMC $425100 ': P-1 $42,50 09/17/2020 AU Meeting: biscussed w/DAW filing motion for CMC ■$475100 P-i ,$47:50 09/18/2020 . DW "I Various Drafted and filed motion to set case management. ' conference;.re. MSJ1st or Fee hearing 1st $425.00 :. o,5. $212.50 09/18/2020 r DW E-mail Responded to Pi's•97’1.6/20 emailarid refused to ’ withdraw,57.105 motion'; provided copy of motion to set CMC and available dates for' hearing -.1 . $425.00 0.1 $42.50 09/18/2020 ' DW E-mail Reviewed Pi's ernaij insisting that 57:i05 motion be withdrawn $425.00 O.b ■ $42.50 09/18/2020 DW E-mail Replied to Pl's counsel that the 57.105 motion for sanctions will not be withdrawn and asking for .responseprer.CMC $425.00 .0.1 $42.50 09/18/2020 DW. E-mail Sent client copy of email exchange.w/ Pl's counsel; called and spoke w/Client $425.00 0:5 $212.50 09/22/2020 / DW Various Drafted and filed Notice of Hearing on 10/15/20;- set tip Court Call; spoke w/ client, re; hearing date $425.00 0:7 $297.50 10/02/2020 DW- Review ■ Reviewed Pl’s Menibof Law opposing Ardnberg's 57.105 motion for fees/sanctions $425.00 0.7 $297.50 10/02/2020 DW Review .Reviewed Pl's Response to Aronberg's request to schedule 57.105 motion for.fees after MSJ $425.00 0.5 $212.50 10/02/2020 AU Review Reviewed Pi's Memo of Law opposing 57.105 motion $475.00 0:5 $237.50 10/02/2020 AU Review Reviewed Pl's Response to Ardnberg:s.request to . schedule 57.105 motion after MSJ $475.00 0.4 $190 00 10/12/2020 DW Research Research caselaw & statutes, re: response toi PCs .Memo of Law . • . ■ . $425.00 1.0 $425.00 10/13/2020 .DW ' Research & Analyze Continued researchingi caselaw, re: response to Pi's memo of law. $425.00 10 $425.00 10/13/2020 DW Draft Created. 1st draft of Response to Pl's Memo of Law and shared w/ Client $425.00 4.0 $1,700.00 10/13/2020 DW Meeting Discussed w/ AU caselaw and draft response to memo S425.00 0.5 $212.50 10/13/2020 AU Various Reviewed draft MSJ,-discussed draft w/ DAW and caselaw $475.00 0:7 $332.50 10/14/2020 DW Draft Finalized and filed Response to Pi's Memo qf'Law $425:00 10; $425.00 10/14/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: memo of law ' $42500 0.2 $85.00 10/14/2020 DW ’. telephone. Spoke w/client again, re: response to memo of law $425.00 0:1 $42.50 10/15/2020 bw - Attend Hearing Attended hearing, re: Motion to Set CMC; called . client to discuss . > ,. ' ' $425.00 i./. _ 1.5 . $637.50 10/15/2020 . ,bw Various Reviewed email arid letter from PI, re: settlement.. Sent copy to. Client and called to discuss. , $425.00' ! ! ’ - - 0.5 $212.50 BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY 09/16/2020 ow E-mail 09/17i2020 ow Mee1ting_ 09t1p2920 .AIJ M~eting ,, -·~, ;~ ~- ·., 0911 Blj:~20 . ow '-'.aricius ·- ... , Q9/lf!/2020 ovv. 09/18/2020 OW E-mail 09/.18/2020 OW E0mail 09/18i2020 OW .E-mail 09/22/2020 OW Various 1·0,0212020 OW" Review 10/02/2020 ow Review 10/02/2020 • 'AIJ Review 10/02i2020 .AIJ Review 10/12/2020 QW Research fonii2020 .ow ,f=le$ean:;h & Analyze ' 10/13/2020 ow Draft 1 oil 312020 Meeiing 10/13/2020 AiJ Various 10/14/2020 .OW Draft 10114i2CJ20 r>w Te_le1:>hone ...... - 'r~iepii~iie. • i 0/14i2020 • ow _ _ ___ . fO/J 5i2Q20 __ ow _ • ·~ttend Heari.ng 10i15t2020 .. DW · Various R.eviewed eni~il from Pl's:couns!!I re,gue!lted f.r~nberg to Y{ifhdraw sa~cticiris 'iriotioi{ wto prejudice . ,· • • • • • :.--.. - .• ........ '. Discussed wrDAW filing motion for CMG .---: -.-···-.- .•. -· :•." .. ; . ;·. - ', ..... ,. or;fted and filed ~qhorhci set~se manage~e~t. •• ·<:?1i~f~n~~l)ei_M.SJ·1~1h'~ii~·~~.ari~g Jii .·.·• • • R;;s'pdndei:i'lo ,PJ's 9/16i20 erria1(a;d r~f~s~·d: io' • Withara~,5].1 Q5 inqlLon; provicled'~p'y of motion to set_fa~c'arnfavailabie dates fof heariiig • -, Rev\eweo•Pl;s'1111afjn~isting ttiai 57:1()5 molionbe wittidtawri • • • • • • • • !=le plied to Pl'S ci9unse1 Iha! the 57, l 05 'motibn fbr sanc:tioris will not he withdrawriand askir:ig for, , response;:re: C"'1,C • Seri!' clienrcppy of €!mail excharige:w/ Pl's coilnsel} , Called ahd Sp'okE! w/.Client , , , ,Qrafted and filid N9tiCE! of Hea,:ing on 10/15/20; set up <::ourt Ca,I(; S~k.~ .. w/ cli~ni, ~e: hearing daie R\iJiewed:Pl's rvierrio oJ La\v opposing Aronberg's 57i10~ motion f6rfees.lsahctions ,RE!vie~1ed Pl's Respo11se ,to Aroriberg's r~qlle~t to sctie~tiie 57,,·105 ·motion for.tees after'MSJ' Review,ed Pl's Memo of Law opposing 57, i 0;i motion , , , - , , , , ••••.••· Reviewecf P['s Response to Aro~tierg:sJE!quest to schedule 57.105 .motion after MSJ Research casela1~ & stat1.i,tes, re.: response.,to Prs .Memqof Law Continued re~earctiing ~~~la,1;, re: re!lponse to PJ's memo.oflaw, ·9,eal!!d\st d,rafl'C>f Re$pO(lse'to Pl's 1\11Elfl10 of L,aw and s-hared wi Ciient • • Discussed wt. AIJ casetaw and draft response to memo Reviewed draftMS,J,discysse9 d,raft w/QAW ~ng caselaw Finalized and tiled Respons·e to Pl's Memo of•Law • . •. • . -. Spokew/client; re: memo of law , , , , _._ ·-·• ·. ·.' . ;. •. :·.,-· •;. ~pokew/ client agair;,'re: response io me[llo of law Reviewed email ahd letter lrbrrt Pl, f~i settlement. se'ntcopy to,Clienta,nd called to discuss. , , , j , $475'.0,Q . . . . $4~5'.00 $425:00 $425.00 $425.00 ,$475.00 $475.00 .r $425,00, $425.00 .J .. ,; $475.00 .$425:00 S42s.oo: . r . $425.bb . I • • -~ $95.00 0.1 .Cl.1 $<12:SQ ..... ·•·.· $p2.5Q 9.i, $42:50_ O.L $42._50 .o.;1 $42'50 ·o:'s $212.50 b,7 $297.50 0.7 $297.50 0.5 $212,50 0:5 $237.50 0.4 $196:oo 1.0 $425.00 1.0 $425.00 4.0 $1,700.00 0.5 $212.50 o)· $33~.50 1,.0, $425:00 0:2 $85:06 ·0:1 s,{2.so $21250 CA/Arop~?~A~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3(27/2023 4:20:48 PM .10/15/2020 ’ pw Telephone Spoke.w/Pl’s counsel, re: settlement- '. $425.00 0 1 • : $42.50 10/15/2020 . DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: Pl’s settlement proposal $425.00 0.2 $85:oo 10/15/2020 AU Various Attended hearing, re: motion to set CMC; discussed w/ client 1 . $4j75.00 1.0 $475.00 10/15/2020 ' AU . Various Discussed Pl’s settlement proposal w/DAW and then w/Client. $475.00 0.4' $190:00 10/15/2020 DW Meeting Discussed Pl’s settlement proposal w/ AU $425100. 0.2 S85.00 10/16/2020 DW Various . Drafted and shared proposed order w/ Pl's counsel ' $425.00 q,5‘ $212.50 10'16/2020 . DW Telephone Spoke w/ Pl’s counsel, re:settlemept . $425.00 ' •• - f • 0.2 ; f $85.00 10/16/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: Pl's settlement proposal $425.00 0-5 . . $212.50 10/16/2020- DW Meeting Discussed Pl's settlement proposal w/ AU $425.00 0.2 $85.00 10/16/2020 AU Meeting Discussed Pl’s-settlement proposal w/ DAW $475,00 0.2 $95.00 10/19'2020 DW Various Uploaded proposed order, re: CMC for Judge Hafele . ■ $425.00 0.1 $42,50 10/19'2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: Pl's settlement proposal $425.00 0.2 $85.00 10/19/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ Pl's counsel, fe: settlement $425.00 0.1 ' $42.50 10/19/2020 AU Meeting Discussed Pl's settlement proposal w/ DAW $475.00' 0.2 $95,00 10/19/2020 DW Meeting Discussed Pi's Settlement proposal w/ AU $425.00 . 0.2 $85.00 10/20/2020 DW' Various Reviewed email from PI, re: settlement; sent copy ■ to Client and called to discuss $425.00 0.5 $212.50 10/20/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: settlement $425'00 0.4 $170,00 .10/20/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ Pl's counsel, re: settlement $425.00 6.1 $42.50 10/20/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: settlement $425:00 0.1 $4250 10/20/2020 DW Meeting Discussed Pl's settlement proposal w/AU $425.00 0.2 $85.00 10/20/2020 AU Meeting Discussed Pl's settlement proposal w/ DAW $475.00 0.2 $95.00 10/21/2020 DW Various Drafted and filed Motion to:Set Hearing oh Aronberg MSJ; drafted proposed order.grantirig motion fd sef; checked court availability; emailed Pl’s cduhsel, re: choose,date for nearing $425.00 1.6 $425.00 10/21/2020 DW .Review Reviewed Order, re: CMC unnecessary $425:00 0.1 $42,50 10/21/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/'clierit, re: media response $425:00. 0.2 $85.00 10/21/2020 D.W Telephone Spoke w/'ciient, re: media response $425:00 . 6.1 $42.50. 10/21/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: media response $425.00 6.1 $42.50 10'21/2020 .: DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re:: media response $425,00 0.T $42.50 10/21/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/'client, re: media response" $425.00 0.1 $42.50. 10/21/2020* pw E-mail Sent email w/ Aronberg statement to media $425,00 0.1. $42.50 10/21/2020 AU Meeting Discussed media response w/ DAW $47.5:00 0.3 $142.50 10/21/2020 DW Meeting Discussed media response w/AU $425.00 0.3 $127.50 10/22/2020 pw Various Reviewed PI's-Ndtice of Dropping-Aronberg;as- party; spoke w/ Clierit.and AU, re: notice and next steps $4 >5.00 0.5 $212.50 CA/Arog^jO^^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY ···--•-·---····-,,. .J' .10/ 15/20 20 . . . ,. • ~-. 1011si2620 • ··•,:·.,,.: Teleptlone 10/15/2020 AIJ • Various . ,·" • 10/15/2020 AIJ Various 10/15/20_20 ow Meeting 10/16/2020 • ow ... - .. ,. :10/1 _~/2020 Telephone 1bi1612020 ow T.elephone 10/16/2020 • DW Meeting 10,1si2020 AIJ Meeting 10/19/202() ow Va_rious 10/1_9/2020. ow 10/19/2020 ow Teleph9ne .. ·- 1 oii 9/2020 AU Meeting i0/19/2020 Meeting 1012012020 ow· VarioLJs 1012012929 OW' Telephone .10/20i2020 OW Teiephone 10/20/2020 OW Telephone ioi20/2020 OW Meeting 10/20/2020 AIJ Meeting fci121i2020 ow Vanous 1012j/2020 ow .Review 10/21/2020 ow Telephone 1oi2112d20 ow Telephone 1012112020 ow Telephone 10/21/2020: ow .Telephone 10/211?020 QW Telephone 1012112020:' ow E-mc1il 10/~1/2020 AIJ M1c?eting 10/?1/2020 ow Meeting -- Spqke w/ e1·s ~ounsel, re_:_ se~eTeiit Sp_cike_~fd1eni, re:-'Prs·settlemeni proposal Attended hearing, re: motion to sefCMC; disc~~~~d w/ client • • • • • ·-. • • • • Discussed Pi's settlement proposalwi DAW and ' then w/ Client Discussed ~l's se,1tler11ent pr9posal w/ AIJ 'Spok"e _wiPrs couns~I. re:\ehlement . -. ----· .. Oiscu~ed Pl's•settlement proposaJ.wlDAW .. , .· .. . ... Uploaded proposed order, re: CMC for Judge H11fele- Spoke WI _client,. re: PJ's -~ettle~ent propo~ll.l Spoke w/ PTs counsel, re: settier,neni" Discusse~_Pl's settlemeintprciposai w/DAW ,, Discussed PJ's settlement proposal w/ AIJ Reviewed e·mail from Pi, re: settlement; sent copy • to Client aiia called to discuss Spok_e w/ ciienJ: ie: settlement Spoke wl PJ's counsel, re: settlement Spoke.WI ciient, re: settlement Discussed Pt's seillement proposai wi AU Discussed Pt's_ settlement proposal w/ DAW Drafted and filed Motion to:Sei Hearing on ft..'roilberg MSJ; drafted proposed order granting motion io:set; checked courtavailability; emailed Pl's courisel, re: ~hocise.date for nearing Reviewedbrder,_re: CMCunil~cessary Spoke wi"dient, 're: media :response Spoke wtclient, "re: me-dia response Spoke wi client, re: media response Spoke w/client, re: rnedia response Spoke ,w/'client, re: _media response· Sent e111c1il w/ Aronberg siaterrient to media D_i$Ct1~e.d media.re~ponsew/ DAW Di~~ssed media,respo11se w/ AIJ ... ·: $425:oo .. ; . ~ • . ! $475.06 $425.00 ,. :-.·.· $425.00 t- -••f $425.00 S475.po $425.00 $425.00 • ' . $425.00 $425.00 $425.00 $4?5:00 $425:00 $425.00 $425:00 ; $475:00, $425.00 $425:oo $425:00 $425:00 $425.00 $425.00 $425.00 $475:09 $4~5.0Q - - ·--· - :·: ... ---------------- Reviei11ed·Pi's·Notice-of·Oropping·Aronberg:as-- -·--··~--·x-·-. ------· - 10/22/2020 :ow Vario.us party; spoke w/ Client.and AIJ, re: notice and next $4?5.00 _ steps • .. • I 1.0 $475.()0 ·.• $190:00 0.2 $85.00 Q.5' 0.2 ,$212.50 $85.09 0.2 $95.00 0.1 $42,50 $85._00 0.1 $4.2:50· 0.2 $95.00 0.2 $85.00 0.5 .$212.50 0.4 $170,90 6.1 $42.50 0.1 s42:so .0.2 $85:ob 0.2 $95.00 1.b $425.00 0.1 $42.50 - 0.2 $85.00 . 0.1 $42.50 0.1 $42.50 0.1 $42.50 0.1 $42.Sci 0.1 $4250 0.3 ~142.50 0.3 $127.50 ----." -~---- re 0.5 $212.50 CA/Aropfi:ffu?iJ\.q¾ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I ---·------·-···- 10/22/2020 AIJ ! Various Reviewed Pl's Notice of Dropping Aronberg as . partyspoke w/Client :and DAW: .re: noticeand. next steps 7' ' ; ■ ’ . 75.00 0.5 $237.50 Totals: : ' 74.8 i $32,440.00 Time Entry Sub-Total: . $32,440.00 Sub-Total: $32,440.00 : ,V ; Total: ; $32,440.00 Amount Paid: . $0.00 Balance Due: 532,440.00 CA/Aropj^O^J® BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY 10/22/2020 AJJ ·"" ••• ·--:._-·_-. .-.-~ .. ,_ . Reviewed Pl's Notice ct cit;pping AroQberg as . · , • · ~;·~p~iif t ~li~~i'ird'.i?A~; reiroti2i~ndre:d steps:- • • • • J ·'··•·. ·1 • $47s:oo r • Tim'~ Entry Sub-T<:i!a,f: . $32,440.0Q sut>,:Total: ; $:32,440.06 • ''(otal: $3i'.Mo.oii • '. _ ~~~lil,lt};~!d, $0:00 • CA/Arcpa~P~A~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I r EXHIBIT “G” EXHIBIT “G” I CA/Arop$^0£|f^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY EXHIBIT "G'·' CA/Aropft.,~p~J\m BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM I .JACOBS'S ASSOCIATES.-PA. .ARTHUR L JACOBS . Jacobs Scholz & Wylefj,- llc A UMrTEO UABIUTY COMPANY OF PROFESSIONALASSOC'ATlONS' . • ATTORNEYS AT LAW~ GATEWAY TO AM EMA >; 961667 GATEWAY8UVO.;>UITE':2OM , Fernandina Bbagh, Florida32O34» ; RICHARD J. SCHOLZ/P.A. ; ’ :mCMARb'X: SCHOLZ TELEPHONE •(904) 261-3693 • FAX NO; (90A)’.261 -7079 OOUGUAS A. WYLER. P.A. DOUGtcASA: WYLER Npyemher 26,2019 Office of the State Attorney J 5th Judicial Circuit U ; ' ! ■ Attn: Jeanne Howard 401North Dixie Highway West Palm Beach, FL 33401 / Re:, CA FloridaHoldings, LLC v. Dave Aronherg etai. Case No.: 2019-CA-014681 Dear Mrs, Howard: The purpose of this letter is to confirm that Jacobs Scholz & Wyler, LLC. will represent you regarding the; above-referenced matter; ? . Our'fees will be contingent upon our success in this matter. You will not be liable or required to pay any monies to our office unless we are successful in our representation of you regarding the above-referenced litigation and receive a court order awarding attorneys’fees. Accordingly, should we be successful in this matter, you agree to be billed for the time incurred in defending this action at pur current hourly rates, At this time, our current hourly rates are: $475.00/hourfor senior partners; $425,00/hourfor other partners, $375.007hour for associate attorneys, and S125.00/hour for paralegal time. ' Furthermore, the attorneys’ fees paid to pur firm shall be calculated by the above listed hourly rates multiplied by the"number ofhours expended in defending this action br.the total fee mandated and awarded ■ by the court orderherein,whicheverisgreater. By signing below, you agree to the terms as set forth above. Please.retum a signed and dated copy of this letter to bur office. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact our office; On behalf of the firm, we are proud to represent you in this matter, , Sincerely, Douglas A, Wyler, Esq For the Fifth , BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY .......... ~, • " -THE t.:AW oinci:s OF . • . • •a.··'·· •• : • _;._,. ,·. \ .. JAl?OBS•& ASSOCIATES.·P:A- . . AR"l'HUR i: JACOBS . i:: • .r~$!~lcR~ftt~t~~~~t-' · · . ·. G~~,i."•")'i:<:>:'-M~Lif .. t .. . . la>S.1~? Cl!'TCWAY,BLyo;,_surra:.zoi-l ••. FERKmINABEAcil;~RioKii~ ~ ~ ,, TE:Le:PHO:i,ie::1~~4) 1:?Gi:.3593 .•• F"AXNo,(oo4l'~~•dsis: Re: CAF~rida;Jlol~.ings,LLC y. l>ave.Artjnberg ~• al . • Case No.:·201~A.:01468l •• • • • • bear Mrs. Howa"rcti •. R1c:·titi!~'.i·f£:}~/;.•. cfou·&0.s A, W'tL~R: P.A .. ~~-~~_A: ~~1:R· Th~ pu~se ofthis Jetter is to .confirm that Ja~obs ~iholz & Wyler, LLC.-wi 1Lr~pr~sent you regard i~g: the• 'aboye_-refei'ericed matter; • .• . . • .• • • ' . • •• ' . .• . • • oudees wili be contingent upori our· success in this matter. y C>U. will nc:>t ~e l_iablt; ~r requ.ired to pay any. monies to our~office,unless wear~ successfutin our·represeniatidn ofyou·regarding tJ:ie ab,ove,referen¢ed li~igaiion and ~eive a c6url cirder}twarding a~d(neys' f~s .. •• . ··• .• . .. , • ••. . • Accordingly, shguid_we be succ~sfu.Un,this·;natter;;you agree to be bille4 fortlte ti rile i.n~iirr&f in defending this action ~t <JU(~~rrenfli:ouriy ,rat~s,. At thi~Jime, our currc:;rifhouriy rates are: $475.()Q/hour_for senior j:>~11Jiers; $4~.5,00/hour/oft>Jl]er p~rtners,' $37_5.00/hour fqr, associate. attorneys, .and $125.:00/hour fqr pataiega1ti~~-- . :: : • • • • • • • • • • • . FuJ::th~tmore, the attorneys'·. feesipai,Ho i;,ur finn shall ~: csJcuiate~·by the _abov:e_ !isted Murty rates ni!ll.tipJied bY. tne·n:uirt_b!:tofhgu~ e~pend~d i_n defendjng this action or.the:fotal fee roahdated an~ ~w,arded • . ?Y-ttie :coµ;):t orde~ !terein, w_~icl]ever:is greater; • By sig~ing beiow; yi;,u agree t~ J:he te,:ms as set. forth a~ve. Pt~·se:retum a sigi1efartd elated c_opy 9f this . Jetter·'to our offi~e'. If you have any ·questions o_r c<jnC:ems,. please cpntact our office·, On ~half of the firm•;-~e a~ Pr<?~d tQ,represent you_i~ this matter. • • • Si~~~~ Dougl~ A: Wyier; ·~s,:q. .. For'ilie Finn . . 1 . .............. -...................................... j-: ·--·•·····----···· ............................ . i/wldC:J_o Date.·· CA/Aro.pft,9ffl:j?~J\~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM EXHIBIT “D” ! 1 EXHIBIT “D” I CA/Arop^i^O^^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY EXHIBIT "D'' EXHIBIT "D'' CA/Arcp:fL~P~Xm BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM i Jacobs Scholz & Wyler, LLC 961687 Gateway Blvd., Suite 2011 Fernandina Beach, FL 32034 United States 904-261-3693 Jacobs Scholz & Wyler, LLG Dave Aronberg Balance Invoice # Invoice Date Payment Terms. Due Date $70,900.27 00409 April 12, 2022 Aronberg (SAO15) adv. CA Florida Holdings, LLC Time Entries Date EE Activity Description Rate Hours Line Total 11/26/2019 DW Review Initial review of summons and: complaint. $425'00 1.'5 ,$637:50’ 11/26/2019 DW Review Reviewed motion for pro hac vice and Judge Hafele'order granting $425.00 0.2 $85.00 11/26/2019 pw Teleconference Teleconference w/ Client, re: response to lawsuit $425,00 0,5 $212.50 11/26/2019 DW- Draft Drafted engagement letter and sent to client $425.00 0.3 $127.50 11/26/2019 PW Review Reviewed 15th circuit local rules 5425.00 t.O $425.00 11/26/2019 AU Review Initial review of complaint $475.00 1.0 $475,00 11/26/2019 AU Meeting Meeting w/ DAW to discuss lawsuit and strategy $475.00 0:5 $237.50 11/26/2019 DW Meeting Meeting w/ AU to discuss lawsuit and strategy $425.00 0,5 $212.50 11/26/2019 AU Teleconference Teleconference w/ Client,re: response to lawsuit $475.00 0.5 $237.50 12/02/2019 DW Research & Preparation Research and prep for Motion to dismiss $425.00 2:0 $850.00 12/02/2019 PW Draft 1 st Draft motion to dismiss $425.00: 1.0 $425.00 12/02/2019 PW Teleconference Teleconference w/ Client, re: draft motion to dismiss: $425.00 6.5 $212.50 12/02/2019 AU. Review Reviewed 1 st Draft MTDismiss S475.00 0.3 $142.50 12/02/2019 AU Teleconference Teleconference w/client, re: draft motion to dismiss: $475.00 6:5 $237.50 12/03/2019 AU Meeting Meeting,wADAW, re: motion to dismiss- $475.00 0:2 $95:00 12/03/2019 pw Meeting Meeting w/'AIJ, re: MTDismiss $425.00 0,2 $85.00 12/06/201.9 DW Draft Completed final draft.of motion to dismiss: filed with Court I $425.00 0,7 $297.50 12'06/2019 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ client, re: final draft of motion to dismiss $425.00 0:5 $212.50 12/06/2019 DW Teleconference Spoke with Clerk's attorney, re: response $425.00 0:5 $212.50 12/06/2019 AU Review Reviewed final draft MTDismiss: $475.00 0.2 $95.00 CA/Ar0PMj°^1Ol BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Jac0Q$ $chO1z· & Wyler, LLC 961687 Gat$way'8Jvd., Suite 2°'1 I Fernandina.Beach, FL 32034 Uniteq State$ Jacobs Scholz & Wyler, LLC 904°261-3693 Dave Aron berg Aronberg (SA015) adv; CA Florida Holdings, LLC· Tirne Entries Daie EE Activity Description 11/26/2019 ow Review Initial review of summons and complaint. j 1/26i'2019 ow Review Review,e9 motion fpr pro hat yice and Ju.dge Hafele'order granting 11/26/2()19 ow_ Teleconference Tl3I~coi"!ference w/ Client; re: responsE:i to law5.1Jil 11/26/2019 ow Draft Drafted .engag$ment letter and sent 10 client 11/26/2019 DW Review Reviewed 15thcircuit local rules 11/26/2019 AIJ Review Initial review of complaint 11/26/2019 AIJ Meeting Meeting w/ DAW io discuss'law'suit and straieg;, 11/26/2019 ow Meeting Meetin£l w/ AIJ to discuss lawsuit and5trale£ly 1· i /26/2019 AiJ Teleco'nference Teleconference! w/ Client,.re: re·sponse to lawsuh 12/02/2()19 ow Research & Research and prep fdr Moti6ri to disinjss Preparation 12/02/2019 ow Draft 1st Draft motion io dismiss 12/02/2019 ow Telecqnference, Teleconference w/ Client, re: draft motion to dismiss 12/02/2019 AIJ Review Reviewed 1 si Draft MT Dismiss 12/02/2019 AIJ Teleconference Telecoriference w/ client, re: draft motion to dismiss 12/03/2019 AI_J Meeting Meeting_w/D/\W, re, motion to dismiss- 12/03/2919 ow Meeting Me'.eting wrAU, re: iylTbistnJss Completed finai drah:ofmotion to dismiss; filed with 12/06/201.9 ow Draft Court 12/06/2019 ow Teleconference Spoke w/ client re, final draft of motion to dismiss 12/06/2019 ow Teleconference Spokewifh Clerk's attorney, re: response 12/06/201~ AIJ Review Review~ final draft MTDismiss Balance Invoice# • 1 ' • Invoice Qate Paym:ent Terms, Due c::>ate $7Q,90Q:27 dd409 April 121 2022 -- • - - - --- - - - -.-.--- -- - • - - - - - - - - • Rate Hours Line Total $425.00 1:5 $637.50 ~425.00 0.2 $85.00 $425.00 0.5 $212,50 $425.00 0.3 $127.50 $425.00 1.0 $425;00 $475.00 1.0 $475.QO i $475.00 0;5 $237.50 $425.00 0.5 $21250 $475.00 0:5 $237:50 $425.0Q 2:Q $850:0Q $425.00 1.Ci $425,00 $425.00, o.5 $212,50. I ~475,00 0.3 $142.50. $475.00 0,5 s2s1:50 $475.00 0:2 $~5,00 1 s425,oo o.g $85.00 I $425:00 0.7 $297.50 I $425.00 0:5 $2i2,.5o . I - $425.00 0;5 $212,50 I $475.00 0.2 $95.00 I I I CA/Arop~~(jb~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3r27/2023 4:20:48 PM 12/06/2019 AU Review Reviewed Clerk!s MTDismiss S475.00 1 0.2 $95.00 12/13/2019 DW Review Reviewed Clerk's Motion to Dismiss, $425.00 0.5 $212.50 01/16/2020 DW Review Reviewed Order Setting Hearing on Defendants' MTDismiss 1 $425.00 0:1 $42.50 01/16/2020 pw Review Reviewed motion for pro hac vice $425.00 ■ t 0,1 $42.50 01/17/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pl's Amended Complaint $425.00 t.o $425.00 01/17/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke with.ctient, re: Amended Complaint $425.00 0.5 $212.50 01/17/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pl's notice.of filing $425.00' 0.1 $42:50 01/20/2020 AU. Review Reviewed PI's Am. Compl $475.00 0.3 $142.50 01/21/2020 DW Review Reviewed Judge Marx's Order Cancelling MTDismiss Hearing $425.00 0.1 $42:50 01/21/2020 bw Review Reviewed Pi's Objection to Defendants' MTDismiss $425.00 0,2 S85.00 01/2.1/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke.with'client, re: Amended'complaint $425.00 0.5 $212.50 01/21/2020 AU Meeting Meeting w/ DAW, re: response to.Am. Compl. $475.00 0:2 $95.00 01/21/2020 DW Meeting. Meeting,w/ AlJ, re: response:to,Am-,Compl. $425,00 0.2 $85,00 01/22/2020 DW Review Reviewed Order granting pro hac vice admission $425,00 0,1 342.50 01/22/2020 DW Research & Draft Researched and drafted response to Amended Complaint $425.00 1.0 $425.00 01/23/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke with Clerk’s attorney, re:response to amended complaint $425.00 0.2 $85:00 01/24/2020 DW Various Completed Ahswer/MTpismiss Amended Complaint; filed with Court;,sent copy to Client $425.00 1.0 $425,00 01/24/2020 DW Draft Drafted and filed Notice of Unavailability $425.00 0.4 $170.00 01/24/2020 AU Review Reviewed final Answer/MTDismiss $475.00 0.2 $95.00 01/27/2020 DW Review Reviewed Clerk's Answer/MTDismiss: $425.00 0.3 $127.50, 02/03/2020 bw Review Reviewed Order setting hearing on Defs’ MTDismiss $425.00 0.1 $42.50 02/03/2020 DW Teleconference Spo.ke-w/ client, re: order setting, MTDismiss hearing: for March 24, 2020 $425.00 0.5 $212.50 03/13/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pl's Opposition, to Aronberg MTDismiss & Clerk's MTDismiss. $425.00 1.5 $637.50 03/13/2020 AU Review Reviewed Pl's Opppsition to Aronberg MTDismiss & Clerk's MTDismiss $475.00 0.7 $332.50 03/18/2020 DW Teleconference Reviewed email from Pl's counsel, re; motion to continue hearing $425.00 0.1 $42.50 03/18/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pl's unopposed motion for continuance $425.00 0.1 $42.50 03/18/2020 DW E-mail Emails w/ Clerk's counsel, re: Pl’s request to continue, hearing $425.00 0.2 $85.00 03/19/2020 DW E-mail Reviewed email from PI. re: agreed order & responded $425.00 0.1 $42.50, 03/20/2020 bw Review Reviewed Court's agreed order continuing hearing $425.00 0,1 $42,50 04/21/2020: DW Review Reviewed order rescheduling hearing on Defs' MTDismiss $^25;00 1 0:1 $42.50 04/21/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke w/client, re: order rescheduling MTDismiss hearing for. June 3, 2020 Sj*25.p0 0.3 $127.50 04/21/2020 AU. Review Reviewed Order rescheduling MTDismiss hearing $475.00 0:1 $47.50 05/22/2020 DW Review Reviewed order setting Zoom hearing, re: MTDismiss $j425.Q0 0,1 $42:50 CA/AroPte?)0^J® BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY ... 12/()6/2019 AIJ Review Reviewed Clerk!s MTDismiss $475:oo 0.2 $95:do. I 12/13/2019 ow Review Reviewe_d Clerk'_s Motion to Dis.miss. $425.00 0:5 $2:12.50 I • 01_/16i2020 Revi~Vlied Orde_r SEJttirig He_arilig ori Peferidants' I $42.50 ow Re.view MTDismiss. $f25.00 0,1 01/16/.2020 PW RevlElw Revl¢Vlie_d rn:otiQQ fC>r pro hac yice $425.00 0.1 $42.50 r 01/17(2020 ow R~view Revieiweq Pl's.Am~m:ied .C<>mplafnt $425,00 i.6 $425.00 01/17/2020. ow Teleconference Spokewith:cfient, re: Amended Complaint $125.00 0.5 .$212.50 01/17/2020. ow Review Reviewed PJ's notice.of filing $425.00 0.1 $42:50 01/20/2020 AIJ. Review Reyiewed PJ's ~m. Cpmpl $475.00 0.3 $142,50 01/21/2020 ow Review Reviewed judg·e Mtu'x's Ord~l c_ancelli\ig· $425.0b 0.1 $42.50 MT.Dismiss Hearjn9 01/21/20_2Q bw R¢view fWviewe~ Pi's Qbje¢liqr\ lei ·oe(eilc::l_a~ts' ~'1JD1smjss $1_29.00 0,2 $1}5,Q_O ()J/2.1/202() ow Teleconference Spoke,with'clieht, re: Amended·complaint $425.60 0.5 $212.50 01/21/2020 AIJ. Meeting Meeting w/DAW, re: resP,Onse io.Am. Campi. $475:00 0:2 $95:00 01/21/2020 ow Meeting, Meeting,w/ AIJ, re: response:to,Am.,Compl. $42s:oo 0.2 $85.00 0 .1 {2212.02_0 ow Reviev.( Revieiwecl OrcJer ~ranting pro hil.c: yice admission $425,DQ 0,1 $42}iO. 01/22/2020 ow Research & Draft ~~searchec{ ;i.r,q drnited respi;ins¢Jc, /\riienp~d $~25.00 1.0 $425.00 Complaint 01/23/2020 ow Teleconference Spoke with Cl¢r1<·s: attorney, re: respon~e to amended cqmplaint $425.00 0.2 $85,00 01/24/2020 ow Various CoiTipiElted _An.sv.-erffv1TDf~miss Awenc:ied $425.00' 1.0 $425.00 Cornplaint; filed witl:i Court; sent c¢py to Client 011241~0;10 QW Draft Drane~ ?.ncl fil_ed NoJice 61 Unav~ilabiilty" $425.00 0.4 $17Q.QO 01/24/2020 A]J Review Reviewed linaf Answer/MTDismiss $475:bo 0.2 $95.0b 01/27/2020 ow Review Reviewed Clerk's Answer/MTDismiss ~425.00 0.3 ~127.50, 02/03/2020 DW Review Reviewed :Order setting hearing on Deis' MTDismiss • $425:0() 0.1 $42.50 02/03/2020 bW Teleconference Spoke-w/ client, re: order setting, MTDismiss $~25.bO ci.5 $212:50 hearing;for March 24, 2020 • 03/13/2020 ow Review Revie\\le_d Pl's Oppc,sition. to 1,1.ronberg MTDisn:,iss $425.00 LS $637'.5() & Clerk's MTbismiss. 03/i3/2()20 AIJ Review Reviewe_d Pl's Opposition-to Aronbern, MTDismiss $475.00 0.7 $332.50 & Clerk's MTDismiss 03/18/2020 ow TelecMference Reyiewed email fror:nPl's couns~I. re: motion to $425.00 0.1 $42.50 continue hearing 03/18/2020 ow Review Review~d Pl's uriopposed motion for cc,ntiiiuaoce $125.00 OJ $42.50 03/18/2020 ow E-mail Em~il!i w/, Cler~•s ~p_unsel; re; Pl'~ feq1JeJi! tc, $425.00 0,2 $85.00 continue_ heajin~ 03/19/2020 ow E-mail Reviev-,ed ema[I fron,iPI, re: agr~ed ordef 8t $425.00 ci.1 $42.50, responded 03120/2020 bw Revlew· Reviewed Court·~ a~r~ea ord$"r cqn~nu/nq hei'ifirig $425.00 0.1 $42,S_Q 0~/2.1/2020 ow Reyiew Reviewetj order rescheduiing hearing oil DE)fs; $~25.00 0:.1 $42,50 MTDismjs_s I 04/2.1/2020 ow Teleconference Spoke:w/ clienJ, re: orderresched1,1ling MTtiisrii1ss hearir:ig'ior. Jy(11;1 ;3,,2020 I $f25.00 0.3 $127.50 04/2'1/2020 AIJ RE)liiew Reviewed Order rescheduiihg MTDi!irTilSS hearing $~75.00 O:i $47.50 os1m;m20 Reviewed order setting Zoom hearing, re: I $42:50 ow RE)vieW MTDismiss $f25.00 Q.-1 CA/ArOftt<!~P~Ai¾. BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM i 05/22/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ client, re: hearing will be via Zoom S425.00. i 0:2 $85.00 05/27/2020 DW Review Reviewed Clerk's filing: change of. atty of record $425.00 0:-1 $42,50 05/27/2020 pw Teleconference Spoke;with.Clerk's hew counsel, Nicole Fingerhut $425.00 i 0,2 $85.00 05/28/2020 DW E-mail Reviewed Pl's email, re: cases and authorities for MTDismiss hearing; responded" 1 $425,00 0.1 $42,50 05/29/2020 DW Preparation Began oral argument prep for 6/8 MTDismiss hearing 1 $425.00 1..0 $425.00 06/01/2020 DW E-mail Reviewed email from Judge Marx's JA and responded $425.00 0:1 $42.50 06/02/2020 pw Various Reviewed Pi's 500+ page, binder, re: MTDismiss &, prepped for hearing $425.00 3.0 $1,275.00 06/02/2020 DW E-mail Drafted and sent.email to client, re: MTD hearing tomorrow $425.00 0.1 $42.50 06/03/2020 DW Attend Hearing Prepped for and attended MTDismiss hearingvia Zoom $425.00 1,5 $637.50 06/03/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ Client, re: debrief MTDismiss hearing $425.00 0.5 $212.50 06/03/2020 DW E-mail Emailed:courtesy copies'of Aronberg's Answer and MTDismiss to Judge Marx $425.00 0,1 $42.50 06/03/2020 DW E-mail Reviewed response from Client and replied $425,00 0.1 $42.50 06/03/2020 AIJ Attend Hearing Attended MTDismiss hearing via Zoom $475.00 !-0 $475,00 06/03/2020 AU Review Reviewed order granting MTDismiss; w/: prejudice $475.00 0.3 $142.50 06/08/2020 DW Review Reviewed Court’s Order Granting Defendants. MTDismiss Count II w/ Prejudice: $425.00 0:5 $212.50 06/08/2020 DW Various Shared order w/ Client and spoke w/, re: result and plan going forward, re: 57.105 $425.00 0.5 S212.50 06708/2020 DW Various Researched § 57.105'Fla. Stat.; drafted 57.105 demand letter arid proposed motion for-attorneys' fees/sanctibris;;Served Pl's counsel with demand letter and proposed motion. $425.00 2:0 $850.00 06/08/2020 AU Meeting Meeting w/.DAW, fe: Order & 57.105' $475,00 0.3 $142.50 06/08/2020 DW Meeting Meeting,w/AU, re: Order & 57.105: $425.00 0.3 $127.50 06/08/2020 AIJ Review Reviewed 57.105 demand and proposed motion for Sanction $475.00 0.2 $95.00 06/10/2020 DW Various Reviewed notice of change of attorney, re: Clerk; called and spoke w/ hew counsel Cynthia Guerra $425.00 0.3 $127.50 06/23/2020 DW Various Reviewed Pl's letter refusing to voluntarily dismiss amended complaint despite 57.105 demand; called and spoke w/client, re: Pl's refusal & next steps $425.00 1.0 $425.00 06/2372020 DW E-mail Sent client copy, of Pi's letter refusing to dismiss complaint $425.00 0:1 $42.50 06/23/2020 AIJ Review Reviewed PI'S letter refusing to dismiss Count l/Am. Compl. $475,00 0,1 $47.50 07/01/2020 DW Various Spoke w/ client, re: filing of 57.105 motion for fees/sanctions; filed, motion for attorneys1 fees based on Pl's failure to voluntarily dismiss amended complaint count 1 $425.00 1 0.5 $212.50. 07/02/2020 DW E-mail Email to client,re: affidavit and summary judgment; $jl25.00: 0:1 $42.50 07/08/2020 pw Teleconference Discussed w/ClienTdrafting and filing Motion for Summary Judgment and MSJ evidence S|I25.OO 0:7 $297.50 07/08/2020 AIJ Teleconference Discussed w/ Client drafting and filing Motion .for Summary Judgment and MSJ evidence *$ 175.00 0:7 $332:50 CA/AropfggjjOggS BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3'/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY 05/22/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ client, re: hearing will be via Zoom $425,db. 0;2 $85.00 I 05/27/2020 DW Review Revie~e.d Cierk's filing: change_ of. atty of record $425.00 I 0:,1 $42.50 0f>/2712020 PW 'relec9nff:!reince $pol<e,,with;C~l!:!rK'$: new c.oun.se1; Nic:91¢ Fingerhut $425.00 0.2 $8!5.90 I Reviewed Pl's eiTiaii, re: cases:and authoriiies for I 05/28/2020 DW E-roail !vlJDismfss headng; re$porid~cr •• • •• • • $425.00 0.1 $42.50 l • Beg?n oral argUiTI!:!ill preip for 6i8 MTbismiss I 05/29/2020. DW Preparation $425.00 1..0 $425:00 he.i~ririg ' • 06/01/2020 DW E-mail RevieWed·emc!il from Juc:lge M~ux'i, JAand $425.00 b:1 $42.50 tespondec:l Of3/Q2/~0~9 QW Vi:jriqus Reviewed Pl's 500+ page .binder, re: MTDismiss &. $425.00 3.0 $1,27!5:QO preipped ioi'h~c1ring _()6/0~/2Q20 DW E-mai°I Drafted and seniemail to client, re: KtlTD hearing $425:00 (),1 $42:50 tomorrow 06103/2020 o·w A.tterici Hearing Prepped for and attended MTDismiss hearing·via $425.00 L5 $637.!50 Zoom 06/03/2020 DW Teleconference s·poke w/ Client,. re: debrief MTDismiss hearing $425.00 0.5 $212:50 06/03/2020 ow E-mail Emailed courtesy copies: of Ar.onberg's Answef and $425.cid ci.1 $42.50 MTDismiss 16 Judge Marx • 06/03/2020 DW E-mail Reviewed response from Client and r_eplied $425~00 0.1 $42.50 06£03/2020 A.IJ A_tt!:!n_d H¢~tiri'g A_tterided MTDisrfii$s h_ElaringviaZoom $475.00 1.0 $47!5._()_0 06/03/202() AiJ Reviev.i Reviewe~ order grci_ilt1rig Mrnisri]1ss_wf'P,fejUaice $175.00 0.3 $142.!5_() 06/08/2020 DW. Review ReVieWed Court's Ord~r Gfah_\ing Defendants $425,00 0:5 $212,5J) tv'ITDismiss Col.in_! II w/ Prejudic:e, 06/0~/2_02_0 QW Various Shared orderw/ CHent and spoke w/, re: resuirand $425.QJl O.!i $212:50 plari g9ing forw;.ird, re; 57 .1 Qq Researched§ 57.105.Fla. Stat.; drafted 57.105 06/08/2020 DW Various demand let_t_~r c1nc:l prop·osec:l mgtjon f9r,ci_(torneys' $425.00 2:0 $850.00 feestsanctioris;:Served Pl's·tQurisel with c:Jemarid lf3tter and proposed motion. 013/0~/2()20 AIJ Meeting Me?tir')gyv/.DAW, re: Or_der &. 57.105' $475.00 0.3 $142:5_0 96/08/2029 DW Meeting Miff:!ting w/ AIJ, rei: Order & 57 .10f> $425.0Q 0.3 $127.50 06,IQ8/2Q20 AIJ Review Reviewed 57.105 demand and propos·ed motion for $475.00 0,2 $95.00 $cinc(ion 06[10/2020 QW Vario_!.!$ Reviewed notfce of change' of attorney, re: __ Clerk; $425,0Q 0.3 $127.!i_Q qaJleci and spoke w/ heW counsel Cynthic1 Guerra Reviewed Pl's lefter refusing to voluniarily. dismiss 06/23/2029 bW Various g_rnended compi?int despite 57.105 deman9; cglied $4'25.00 1.0 $425.00 • anp spok_e w/ clierit, re, PPs refl!sal &- rie)(t steps 06/23/2020 DW E-mail Sent cli1?nt copy. of Pl's letter reh.1sing to 9ismiss $il25.00 0:1 $42.50 coriiplflirit 06/23/2020 AIJ Review Revieyved Pl's le~er rElfU!:ilhg 19 <jismiss Count I/Am. $475;00 O:J $47:50 C9_mpL SRt>ke w/ client, re: fiilng ot'!57.105 m9!ion for 07/0.1/2020 DW Various fee·stsanttipris; filed. i]Jotiori fora\torneys 1 fees ~~25.00 0.5 $212.50. based on Pl's failure-to voluntarily dismiss I amended complaintcount1 I 07,/02/2020 DW E-mail Email to client; re: a:tficlavit and sum111ary judg111ent: $f25:00, 0;1 $42.50 07/08/2020 DW Teleconference DisciJS,SEld wi ClieiifdraftiriQ" aj}_d filii'lg M_qti9ri J6r .$k25,oo 0:7 $297.50 Summary Judgn_,ent,and MSJ eviderice I - - . 07/08/2020 AIJ Dis,ci.Js$ecl wt c1ie_11Jdr_aiflng ci(lcj D)ir)g _Mo,iiori .for I $332.50 Teleconference SL!rnrnary Judgmerit ancl M.SJ. eviden_ce $f75.00 0:7 CA/Aropfi:ffl5?~A~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3(27/2023 4:20:48 PM I 07/10/2020 DW Draft Created 1 st draft of Aronberg Affidavit; sharedw/ client I S425.00 1.0 $425.00 07/10/2020 AU Various Reviewed draft-affidavit and discussed w/ DAW $475.00 0.3 $142.50 07/10/2020 DW Meeting Discussed draft affidavit w/ AU $425.00 0,2 $85.00 07/13/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pl's Request to Produce, re: Clerk $425.00 0.1 $42.50 07/13/20'20 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ Clerk’s counsel, re: Request to Produce $425.00 0.2 $85:00 07/27/2020 DW Review Reviewed Pl's Amended Request to Produce,, re: Clerk $425.00 0.1 $42.50 07/27/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ Clerk's counsel, re:.Amended Request to Produce $425.00 0.1 $42150 07/28/2020 DW Draft Revised Aronberg affidavit $425.00 0.5 ,$212.50' 07/29/2020 DW Draft Finalized Aronberg Affidavit and sent to client $425.00 0.5 $212.50 07/29/2020 DW Research & Preparation Research and prep for Motion for Summary Judgment $425.00: 1.0 $425.00 07/30/2020 pw Various Received executed Aronberg Affidavit S425.00 QI $42.50 07/30/2O20 DW Draft Began drafting; Motion for Summary Judgment $425.00 2:0 $850.00 08705/2020 DW Draft Continued drafting Motion for Summary Judgment $425.00 1.0 $425:00 08/07/2020 DW: Review Reviewed email from Plaintiff attempting to set hearing on 57.105 motion; for fees/sanctions $425.00 0.1 $42.50 08/10/2020. DW E-mail Sent responsiye.email to Pl's counsel S425.00 0.1 $42.50 08/17/2020 DW Meeting Discussed draft MSJ w/ AU $425.00 0,2 $85.00 08/17/2020 AU Vanous Reviewed draft MSJ and rhet-w/ DAW to discuss $475.00 0.5 $237.50 08/18/2020 DW Draft Finalized Motion for Summary Judgment; filed w/ court along with Aronberg affidavit- $425=00 2:0 S850.00 08/27/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke w/ Cierk’sicounsel, reTrequest to produce $425.00 6,1 $42.50 09/01/2020 DW Various Reviewed Pl's.iemail and accepted conference:call invite for 9/2/20 $425.00 0-1 $42.50 09/02/2020 DW Review Reviewed Clerk's response to request for production $425.00 0:2 $85.00 09/02/2020 DW Teleconference Spoke-w/ Pl's counsel, re: dispute:as:to whether MsJ should be heard before 57.105 fee motion;or vis versa - call was unsuccessful $425.00 6.5 $212.50 09/02/2020 AU Meeting Discussed w/ DAW phone call w/ Pl's counsel $475.00 0.2 $95.00 09/02/2020 DW Meeting Discussed w/ AU phone call w/ Pl's counsel $425.00 0.2 $85.00 09/16/2020 DW E-mail Reviewed email from Pl's counsel requested Aronberg to withdraw sanctions motion w/o prejudice $425.00 0,1 $42.50 09/17/2020 DW Meeting Discussed w/ AU filing motion for CMC $425.00: 0.1 $42150. 09/17/2020 AU Meeting Discussed w/ DAW filing: motion for CMC $4 Z5.00 0:4 $47.50 09/18/2020 DW Various Drafted and filed motion to set case management conference; re: MSJ 1 st:or Fee hearing 1 st $425.00 0.5 $212.50. 09/18/2020 DW E-mail Responded to Pl's 9/16/20 email and refused to withdraw 57.105 motion; provided copy of motion to set CMC and available dates for bearing $425.00 0,1 $42:50 09/18/2020 DW E-mail Reviewed Pl's, email insisting that 57.105 motion be withdrawn $425.00 0.1 $42:50 09718/2020 DW E-mail Replied to Pl’s counsel that the 57.105 motion for sanctions will notbe withdrawn and asking; for response, re: CMC s.125.00 0:1 $42.50 CA/Arop^O^a^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3^27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Creaied 1st draft of Aron berg Affidavit; shared'w/ I 07/10!2020 ow Draft $4'25.00 i.o $425.00 client I ... 07/10/2020 AIJ Various Reviewed drafraffidavit and discussed w/DAW $475.00 I 0.3 $142:SO 07/10/2920 ow Meeting Discus_sed dfaft ~fficl~vitwiAIJ $425.00 ! . - . 0.2 $85:00 07/13/2020 ow· Revievf Reviewecl Pl's Request to Produce, re: Clerk $425.00 0.1 $42:SO: I 07/13/2020 DW Teleconference s·poke w/ Clerk's counsel, re: Request to Produce $425.00 0.2 $85:00 07127!2020 ow Fi~view Reviewed !?l's.Amended Request to Produce, re: $4°25.00 0.1 $4250 Clerk • 07/27/2020 ow Teleccfnferen~ Spoke·w/Clerk'scounsel, re:.Amended Request to s425·_06 0.1 $42:SO Produce 07/28/2020 ow Draft Revised Aronberg affidavit $425.00 o:s $212.50' 07/29/2020 ow Draft Finalized Aron berg Affidavit and serif to client $425.00 0.5 $212:SO 07/29/2020 DW R¢se_ar9h & fl~,searc::h qnd prep i9r ¥o!iori for'Surnmary $425.00' 1.0 $425.00 Preparation Jud1;1ment Q?/30/2920 ow Vg_rib_Lis_ Re9eived ~~~c:LJt_eo ivontj~rg AiUclavjt $42!?:0Q, Q.1 $42:SQ 07/30/2020 DW Draft Began drafting Motion for Summary Judgment $425.00. 2:0 $850;00 08/05/2020. DW Drafi Coniinued drafting Moiion for Summary Judgment $425.00 1.0 $425:00 08/07/2020 ow Review Reviewed.email from Plaintiff attempting to set $425.00 0.1 $42:50 hearing on 57.105 moiion for fees/sanctions 08/10/2020. ow E-mail Sent responsivl:l;e[Tlail to Pl's counsel $425.00' 0:1 $42.50 08/17/2020 ow Meeting Discussea draft MSJ w/ AIJ $425.00 0.2 $85.00 oal17t2020 AIJ Vanous Reviewed drafHvisj anci. mehw/ DAW 10 discuss $475.00 Q:5 $237.50 QB/18/2020 ow Draft Finalized Motion for·~uhlm~ry Judgment; filed w/ $425,00 2:0 $850,00 court alonQ with .t>.rpiJ\)erg aJfji:i~viJ 08i27 !2020 ow Teleconference s·pokewi Cierk's counsel, re:.requesno produce $425.00 0.1 $42.50 091011202p ow Va;rio'us Reviewed Pl's;email and accepted conference.call $425.QQ 0:1 $42.50 invfie for 9/2/20 09/02/202.0 DW Review Reviewed Clerk's response io request for $125.QQ 0:2 $_a!>:oo. production 09/02/2020 ow Teleconference Spoke,w/ Pl's counsel_; re: dispute,asJo whether $425.00 $212.50 MSJ should be heard before 57.105 fee motion or 0.5 vis versa • calf was LlnS\iCCSSSfLJI 09/02/2020 AIJ Meeting Discussed wi DAW phone call" w/ Pl's counsel $475.00 0:2 $95.00 09/02/2020 DW Meeiing Discussed w/ AIJ phone call w/ Pl's-counsel $425.00 0.2 $85.00 Reviewed email from Pl',s couns_E?I requested 09/16/2020 DW E-mail Aronberg to withdraw·sanctions motionw/o $425.00 0.1 $42:SO prejudice 09/17/2020 ow Meeting Discussed wl AIJ filing motion for CMG $425:oo 0.1 $42:SO 09/17/2020 AIJ Meeting Discussed w/ DAW filing motion for CMG $475:00 O;J $4750 09/18/2020 DW Various Drafieci cirid filed motion to set case rii?nagerilent $425.00 0:5 $212.50 conference; re: MSJ 1 st:.or Fee hearing 1st Respons:Jed l<:J Pl's 9/16/2Q,etna[I and refuseiftCJ i E-mc:1il $425.00 $42,~0 09/18/2020 ow withdraw 57.105 motion; provided copy of motion .to I 0.1 set CMG and available dates for hearing 09/iB/2020 DW E-mail Revieweo Pl'i; email insisting that 57.105 motion be $425.00 o.1 $42:50 withdrawn I RepliE:ld to Pl'.,s counsel that the 57,105 motion for l 09/18/2020 DW E-mail sanctions will not be withdrawn and asking: for $f25.0o 0:1 $42:SO response, re: CMG CNArop~~9,]\~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3~27/2023 4:20:48 PM 09/18/2020 DW E-mail Sent clientcopy of email exchange w/ Pl’s counsel; called and spoke w/ Client . 1... . $425-00 0:5 $212.56 09/22/2020 DW Various Drafted and filed Notice of Hearing on 10/15/20; set up Court Call; spoke w/clien't, re:.hearing date 1 $425.00. 0.7 $297.56 10/02/2020 DW’ Review Reviewed Pl’s Memo of Law opposing Aronberg’s. 57.105 motion for fees/sanc'tions’ .1... $425.00 0:7 $297.50 10/02/2020 DW Review Reviewed pi’s Response to Aronberg’s: request to schedule 57.1.05 motion for fees after MSJ: 1 $425.00 0:5 $212.50 10Z02/2020 AU Review Reviewed Pl’s Memo of Law opposing 57.105 motion $475.00 0.5 $237.50' 10/02/2020 AU Review Reviewed Pi’s Response to Aronberg’s request to schedule 57.105 motion after MSJ $475.00 0.4 $190.00 10/12/2020 DW Research Research casejaw & statutes, re: response to Pl’s Memo of Law $425.00 1.0 $425:00 10/13/2020 DW Research & Analyze Continued researching caselaw, re: response to Pl’s memo of law $425.00 1.0 $425.00 10/13/2020 DW Draft Created 1st draft of Response to Pl's Memo of Law and shared w/ Client $425.00: 4.0 S1,700.00 10/13/2020 DW Meeting: Discussed w/ AlJ casejaw and draft response to memo $425.00 0.5 $212.50 10/13/2020 AU Various Reviewed draft MSJ, discussed draft w/ DAW and caselaw $475.00’ 0.7 $332.50 10/14/2020 DW Draft Fjnaijzediand filed Response to Pi's .Memo of Law $425.00 1:0 $425.00 10/14/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: memo of law $425.00 0.2 $85.00 10/14/2020 DW Telephone: re: response to memo:of law’ $425.00, 0.1 $42.50, 10/15/2020 DW Attend Hearing Attended.hearing, re: Motion to Set CMC: called clientto discuss $425.00 1.5 $637.50 10/15/2020 DW Various Reviewed email andjetter from PI' re: settlement. Sent copy to Client and called to discuss. $425.00 6.5 $212.50 10/15/2020 DW Telephone Spoke-w/ Pl's counsel, re: settlement. $425,00 0.1 $42.50 10/15/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: Pl's settlement proposal $425,00 0,2 $85100: 10/15/2020 AU Various Attended hearing, re: motion to set CMC; discussed w/ client $475.00. 1,0 $475.00 10/15/2020 AU Various Discussed Pl's settlement proposal w/ DAW and then w/ Client: $475.00 0.4 $190.00 10/15/2020 DW Meeting Discussed Pl's settlement proposal w/AU $425.00 0:2 $85.00 10/16/2020 DW Various Drafted and shared: proposed order w/ Pl's counsel $425.00: 6:5 $212.50 10/16/2020 DW Telephone Spoke-w/ Pl’s counsel, re: settlement’ S425.00 0:2 $85.00 10/16/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: Pl's settlement proposal $425.00 0.5 $212.50 10/16/2020 DW Meeting DiscussecPl’s settlement proposal w/ AiJ $425.00 6-2 S85.00 10/16/2020 AU Meeting Discussed Pl's settlement proposal w/ DAW $475.00 0.2 $95.00 10/19/2020 DW Various Uploaded proposed order, re: CMC for Judge Hafele' $425.00 i 0.1 $42:50 10/19/2020 DW Telephone Spoke, w/ client, re: Pl's settlement proposal $jl25.00i 0:2 $85:00 10/19/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ Pl's counsel , re: settlement $1,25.00 0:1 $42.50 10/19/2020 AU Meeting Discussed Pl's settlement proposal. wZ DAW $^75.00 0.-2 $95.00 10/19/2020 DW Meeting Discussed Pi’s settlement proposal w/ AU $425.00 0,2 $85.00 10/20/2020 DW Various Reviewed email from PI, re: settlement; sent copy to Client and. called to discuss $ 125.00 0.5 $212.50 CA/Arop^o^ag, BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY 6$/18/2020 ow E0 mail Senf clienl'copy of email.exchange w/ Pl's counsel; sl':~5.oo 0:5 $212.56 called and spokew/ Client I .. Drafted .and filed Noiice of Hearing on 10/15/20; sei I 0.7 $29i.50 09/22/2020 ow Various $425;00 up Couri Call; spokew/clienl, re:.hearing date • I 10/02/2020 ow Review Reviewed Pl's Memo of Law opposing Aron berg's. 57 .105 motion. for fees/sanctions, • sJ25.oo I • 0:7 $297.56 Reviewed .Pl's Response·to Aronberg's:request·to ! ib102f2b29 ow Review schedule 57 .105 motion for fees after MSJ $425.0Q ():5 $212.50 1 0/.02/2020 AIJ Review Reliie\Jlled Pl's Memo qf !.:aw oppi>;;tn~ 57, 1 O!> $475.00 o:5 .$237.50' motion 10/02/2020 AIJ Review RevieWed Pi's Resp'qnse tq Afonqerg's request to $475.00 0.4 $190.00 schedule 57.105 m·otionafter MSJ • • 10/12/2020 ow Research R.eseiarg, c;_a.s13Jav.i & statuteis; re; respcins:ti tq ?l's $425.00 1.0 $425,00 Memo of Law 10/13/2020 ow Re~arch~ CoriJ[n\.ied re:se~ching ci:l.sef~Vil;re: respori~ Jo $425.00' 1.Q $425.00 Analyze Pl's memo o.f'law l0/13/2020. ow Draft Cf!3cl1El_Q Js_t ilr1:iii 91 fl~spqpse to Pj's Memo o( L_cl~ $425.00' 4.0 $1,700.00 and shar_ed w/ Clien_t 10/13/2020 ow Meeting Djscu_~seq w/ AJJ q:fseiaw a_n_d q_rait response tg $425'.00 o:5 $212.50 memo • 10/13/2020 AIJ Various Reyii3wed draft MsJ, dis9Lis'$!:!d dr<i.itw/ 'pAi/-J ~ti~ $475.00' 0.7 $332.50 cas!'i[a\JV 10/14/.2020 b,w Drait FJil'?li)zed:and lil~cl A:!sponse t!S Pj's .Merjl.9 qi Lal:V $425.00 LO $42!5.QO 10/14/2020 ow Telephone Spoke•wi cl1ent; re: memo of law $425.00 0.2 $85.dcr 1.0/14/2020 ow Telephone Spoke·w/ client·again, re: response to memo:o!Jaw· $425.00 0.1 $42:50. 10!15/2020 ow Atte·na Hearing Attended. hearing, re: Motion lo Set CMG; called $425.06 1.5 $637.50 client to discuss I 1 tiii 5/2020 bW Vanous Re.viewed email and: letter from Pl; re: settlement. $425.cici: 6:5 .$2-12;50 Sent copy to Client and called to discuss. 10/15/2020 ow Telephone Spoke.wt Pl's .counsel, re: settlement. $425.00 0.1 $42.50 1 Q/15/2020. QW Telephone Spoke \JV/ _clierit; re: Pl'$ settlement propqsa[ $425.00 0.2 $85:oo 10/15/2020 AIJ Various Attended hearing, re: mdtfo'n to setCMQ; $475.00. 1.0 $475,00 discusse_dw/ client 10/15/2020 AIJ Various b,~u~s~d F% se~iemEl°nt proposal wi DAW :and $;i75.00 0.4 $190.00 th~n wJ Clierit 10/15/2020 OW MeElting bi_scus~ed Pl"s settlement propQ$al wi AIJ $425:0Q 0:2 $as.po 10/16/2020 ow Various Drafied and shared' proposed order'w/ Pl's counsel $425.00 0:5 $212.50 l0/16/2020 OW Telephone Spoke,w/ Pl's counsel, re: setilemeni' $425:00 0:2 $85.00 10/16/2020 ow Telephone Spoke, w/ ,clie11t, re: Pl's settlement p,roposal $425.00 0.5 $212:50 10/16/2020 QW Meetin-g Dis.¢Lisse~ Pl's se,ttiement proposai wi AiJ $425.00 o.i $85:09 10(16/2020 AIJ MEletjng Dl$CUS$ecl Pl'$:settlemelitpr9p6$$l w/DAW $475.0Q 0.2 $95.QO 10/19/2()20 ow Various Uploaded proposed order, re: CMC·for Judge $425.00 0.1 $42:50 Haf!:!le' ! 10/19/2020 ow Telephone Spoke,w/ client,_ re: Pl's seitlement proposal $f25.00 0:2 $85:00 10/1.9/2020 ow Telephone Spokew/ Pl's _counse[, re: settlement $f25.00 0,1 $42.50 10/19/2020 AIJ Meeting Piscu!ised PJ's s_ettlemeot proposal w/ DAW $fr75.QO Q,2 $95.QO 10/19/20.20 bW Meeting DistUS:sed }:i1•s sEi_ttlElrnent propos~J v_,J_/f.l~ Sf2~.oo o_:2 $85.0_0 10/20/2020 ow ReviElWed emclil from Pl, rEl: settlement; sent copy I 0.5 $212:50 Various to Clie111 and ¢allecl 19 discuss: $f25.00 CA/Arcp~~~Al~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 31/27/2023 4:20:48 PM 10/20/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client,, re: settlement $425.00 0.4 $170.00 10/20/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ Pi’s counsel; re: settlement $425.00 0:4 $42.50 10/20/2020 QW telephone $poke/w/ client;, re: settlement $425.00 0,1 $42:50 10/20/2020 DW Meeting Discussed Pi's settlement proposal w/ AU $425.00 • 1 0:2 $85.00 10/20/2020 AU Meeting Discussed Pl's settlement proposal w/ DAW $475.00 0.2 $95.00 10/21/2020 DW Various Drafted and filed Motion to Set Hearing on Aronberg MSJ; drafted proposed order granting motion to set; checked court availability; emailed Pi’s counsel; re: choose date for hearing S425.00 1.0 $425.00 10/21/2020 Dw Review Reviewed Order, re": GMG unnecessary $425.00 0.1 $42.50 10/21/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client,, re: media.response $425.00 0.2 $85.00 10/21/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: media response $425.00 0:1 $42:50 10/21/2020: DW Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: media response $425.00 0,1 $42,50 10/21/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ client,: re: media .response $425,00 0.1 $42.50 10/21/2020 DW Telephone' Spoke w/ client, re: media response $425.00 0,1 $42:50 10/21/2020 DW E-mail Sent email w/’Aronberg statement to media $425.00 0.1 $42.50 10/21/2020 AU Meeting Discussed media response w/ DAW $475.00' 0:3 $142.50 10/21/2020 DW Meeting Discussed media response w/ AU $4.25.00 0.3 $127.50 10/22/2020 DW Various Reviewed FTs Notice of Dropping Aronberg as party; spoke w/ Client arid AU, re: notice.and next steps $425.00 0,5 $212.50 10/22/2020 AU Various Reviewed Pl's Notice of Dropping Aronberg as party; spoke w/ Client and DAW, re: notice and next steps* $47.5.00 0.5 $237.50 11/05/2020 DW Draft Draft Amended. Motion forAttorneys' Fees & Costs $425.00 3.0 $1,275.00 11/06/2020 DW Draft Continue drafting Motion for Attorneys' Fees & Costs and Affidavit of Attorneys Fees and Affidaivt of Reasonable Attorneys' Fees, sent to expert for review $425.00 2.0 $850.00 11/09/2020 DW Various Callw/ expert, re: affidavit; Call w/ Client, re: filings; filed Motion & Affidavits $425.00 i.O $425.00 12/03/2020 DW Draft & File Draft,and File Notice for Non-Jury Trial; email to JA; ernails w/opposing counsel counsel to set meeting $425.00 0.7 $297,50 12/09/2020 DW Teleconference TC w/ opposing counsel; meeting w/AU afterwards $425.00 1.0 $425.00 12/09/2020 AU Meeting AU - TC w/ opposing counsel; meeting w/ DAW afterwards $475.00 1.0 $475.00 12/10/2020 DW Draft & File Draft,and File-Amended Notice for Non-Jury Trial $425.00 0:5 $212.50 01/28/2021 DW Various Review Order Setting Hearing; emailed to client $425.00 0:2 $85.00 03/25/2021 DW Review Review Notice of Change of Counsel $425.00 0.1 $42.50 04/22/2021 DW Review &,Analyze Review and analyze Pl's.MSJ & Appendix $425.00 1.0 $425.00 05/24/2021 DW Review ReviewPI’s Motion to Set Hearing $425.00 0.1 $42.50 05/25/2021 DW Review & Analyze Review Notice of Appearance & Response to. Pl's Motion to Set $425.00 1 0.3 $127.50 06/11/2021 DW Review Reviewed Agreed Order S425.00 0.1 $42,50 07/14/2021 DW Preparation Prep for hearing and trip to West Palm Beach $425.00 2:0 $850.00 07/15/2021 DW Travel Travel to West. Palm Beach $425.00 5.5 $2,'337.50 07/16/2021 DW Attend Hearing Prep for and attend'hearing $^25.00 1.5 :$637;50 CA/Arop^O^aj, BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3^27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY 10/20/2020 DW Telephone Spoke w/ ciien\,, re: setilement $425,00. 0.4 $110.00, I •1 0/20/2020 ow Telephone Spoke w/ Pl's counsel, re_: settlement $425:00 I • 0::1 $42:50 10120/2020 PW 'reiephoi:i.e $poke,w/ pi lent, re: settlei:fierit $425.QO I OJ $42,50 10/20/2Q20 bW Meeting D1$Cussed Pl's seriiement proppsal W!AiJ $425.00 0:2 $!35.0_D I 10/20/2020 AIJ Meeting Discussed Pl's sehlemeni proposal w/ DAW $475.00 0.2 $95.00 • I Drafied and filed Motion to Set Hearing on 10/21/2()20 PW Vc!_ribus Aronberg MSJ; drafted proposed order granti11g $425.00 1.0 $425.00 motion to s~t; .checked cc,Urt f'vail~ility; emajlE!d PPs cou.nsel. re: ~hoos~ date for h·e?"rihg 1 0/2·1 /2026 ow Review R·eviewed Or4~r. re: CMC.uhnec·essary $425.00 0.1 $42:50 10/21/2020 DW Telephone s·poke•w/ client,. re: media.response $425.00 0.2 $85,CJO 10/21/2020 DW Telephone Spokew/ cli_ent,. re: media response $425.00 0,1 $42'.50 10/21/2020. ow Telephone Spoke w/ client, re: media response $425:00 0.,1 $42.50 101g112920 DW Telephone Spol<Ei wt ciient, re: hJEidla: fespons:e $425.00 Q.1 $42:50 10/21/2020 DW Telephone Spoke 0w/ client,_ re: media response· $425.00 0.1 $42:50 10/21/2020 DW E-mail S'entemail W/'Aronberg statement to media $425.00 0.1 $42.50 10/21/2020 AIJ Meeting D.iscussed media response_ w/ DAW $475.00' 0,3 $142.50 1 0/2-1 /2020 DW Me_etirig .Disi1.1s_s,M riieaiareispons.e w_/ AJJ $425:00 Q,3 '${27,50 RevieWeci Pl's Noticed Dropping Aforiberg as $425.00 10/22/2Q20 DW Various party; spoke .w/ CJierit and AIJ,re: notice.and neixt 0.5 $212:50 steps Re_vieweid Pl's Notice_ of Dropping Aronl:Jerg as 10/22/2020 AIJ Various party; spoke w/ Client and DAW,"re: notice•and next $475.00 0.5 $237.50 steps, 11/05/2020 ow Draft Draft ArTlended Motion for-Atiomeys' Fees & Costs $425'.00 3.0 $1,275.00 Goritinue:drafting tvlqtion for Attorneys' Fees & 11/06/2020 bW Draft Cos is and Affidavit of Attorneys Fees and Affidaivi· $425.00, 2.0 $850,00 of Reasonable Attorneys' Fees, seni io expert for review i 1/09/2029 DW Various Call w/ expert, re: affidavit; Call w/ Client, re: filings; $425.09 i.O $425,QO filed Motion & Affidavits 12/03/2020 bW Draft & File Draft.and File Notice for Non-JuryTrial;·email to JA; emails wi opposing counsel coiJns~I to set $425.00 b.1 $297.50 meeting 12/09/21)20 bW Telecohferehce TC w/opposing, counsel; meeting w/AIJ afterwards $425·_00 1.0 $425.0b 12/09{2()20 AIJ Meeting AIJ - TC w/ opposin_g counsel; meeiing w/ DAW $~f75.00 i.O $47~:0p afterwards· 12/10/2020 DW Drafi' & File Draft.and File·Amended Notice forNon-JuryTrial $425.00 0:5 $212.50 01/28/2021 DW Various Review Order Setting_ Hearing; emailed to client $425.00. 0:2 $85.00 03/25/2021 ow Review Review Notice of Ch?l,hgeoiGoiJrisei $425·.oo 0.1 $42:SO. 04/22/2021 DW Review &,Analyze. Review and analyze Pl's. MSJ & Appendix $425.00 to $425.00 05/24/202,1 DW Review Review·Pf's·Motion to Set Hearing $f25.00 0.1 $42:50 Review.&. Analyze Review Notice of Appea~ance & Response to. Pl's l $127:SO 05/25/2021 DW $425.00 0.3 Motion ,fo Set I ,06/11 /2021 DW Re.view· Reviewed Agr.eed Order $425.00 i 0.1 $42.50 07/14/2021 bw PreRarati_oh Ptep fqr•hearing and trlp .to West.PailllB~ach ~'125.00 2,0 $~50.00 !)'Z/15/2021 bw Travei Travel to West Palm Beach sf25,oo 5.5 $2,33i50 07/16/2021 DW Attend Hearing Prep for and attend' hearing $125.00 1.5 .$637:SO I CNArcp~~~Al¾ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK 3(27/2023 4:20:48 PM 07/16/2021 DW Review & Analyze Reviewand analyze PI's memo flaw; draft response outline I $425.00 1.5 $637.50 07/16/2021 DW Teleconference Call w/ Glient, re: entitlement hearing week of 7/26 $425.00 0:3 $127,50 07/16/2021 DW Teleconference Call w/AIJ, re: hearing week of 7/26 $425.00 6-1 $42.50 07/16/2021 DW Teleconference Call w/ DAW following hearing $425.00 6-1 $42.50 07/17/2021 DW Travel Travel back to Amelia Island $425.00 5.5 $2,337.50 07/19/2021 DW Various Research, review, and'analyze Pl's memo of law; motion for atty fees, begin drafting responsive memo $425.00 2.5 $1,062.50 07/20/2021 DW Draft Draff frierrio of law in suppor of Arnerided Motion for Atty Fees $425.00 4-0 $1,700.00 07/2172021 PW Draft Complete 1st draft memo of law in support.of amended motion for atty fees $425.00 3.0 $1,275.00 07/21/2021 DW Meeting Meeting w/ AIJ, re: memo of law $425.00 0.5 $212.50 07/21/2021 AIJ Various Review and analyze memo of law; meeting w/ DAW to discuss $475.00 1,0 $475.00 07/23/2021 DW Various Complete and File Memo of Law; Meeting w/AIJ to discuss; call to JA; call to Client; several emails w/ opposing counsel $425.06. 2:0 $850.00 07/23/2021 AIJ Meeting Meeting W/ DAW, re: Memo of Law $475.60 6.5 $237.50 07/23/2021 DW E-mail Email exchange w/ opposing counsel, re: entitlement'hearing $425.00 0,2 $85.00 07/23/2021 DW Teleconference Call to Judge: Hafale'sJA, re: hearing :dafe $425.00. 611 $42.50 07726/2021 DW Review & Analyze Review Order Setting hearing for 7/27, review Notice of Appearance, review Order Resetting Hearing for 8/17/21 $425.00. 0.5 $212.50 07/27/2021 DW Various Review email from Op. Counsel. & phone call $425.00 0:4 $170.00 07/28/2021 DW Draft Draft updated Memo of Law in support of Motion for Attorneys'fees $425.00 2.0 $850,00 07/29/2021 DW Draft & File Complete drafting: and Tie updated Memo of Law $425.00 2:0 $850:00 07/30/2021 DW E-mail Responded to Op- Counsel's email $425.00 0,1 $42.50. 08/03/2021 DW Teleconference Call w/ Client, re: witnesses and plan for 8/17 hearing $425.00 1.0 $425.00 08/04/2021 DW: Various Several emails & calfw/opposing counsel & TC, re: motion.to continue $425.00 0:7 $297,50 08/04/2021 DW Teleconference Call w/ Client, ok to file joint motion to continue $425.00 0:2 $85.66 08/05/2021 DW Various Emails w/opposing counsel, re: Joint Motion to Continue; review motion to continue $425.00 0:5 $212.50 08/09/2021 DW Various Review Order Granting Continuance and setting calendar call for 3/4/22;-called client to discuss $425.00 6.5 $212.50 08/09/2021 DW Various Call w/ Client, re: continuance until March 2022; meeting w/ AIJ $425,00 07 $297:50 08709/2021 AIJ. Meeting. Meeting w/ DAW, re: continuance $475.00 6.5 $237.50 08/1172021 DW Drafts File Draft Amended: Memo of Law to comply w/ TO page limit . L.. . $^25.00 3.0 $1.275.00 08/1272021 DW Various Complete draft Of Amemded Memo-of Law.& filed; reviewed and responded to several emails w/ opposing counsel $425.00 2:0 $850:00. 09/09/2021 DW E-mail Reviewed and replied to op. counsel's email $425.00 0.2 $85:00 09/10/2021 DW E-mail Reviewed and replied to op. counsel's email $•425.00' 0.2 $85.00 CA/Arop^-pp^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Review·and analyze ·p1•s memo flaw; draft I 67/16/2021 ow Review & AnaiyzE_j $4'25.00 i.5 $637:56 response outline I 07/16/2021 ow Teleconference Call w/'Client re: entiilement hearing week of 7/26 $425.00. I 0:3 $127.50 Calhvl AIJ, re: hearing week of? /26 I ()7!16/2021 ow T§ileconfere_h~ ~25,00 0-1 $42:50 07./16/2!)21 ow_ Telete>hfer~nce Gaff -w(DA,W iqflowihg h~ariilg $425:00 I P-1 $11-2:5.0 07/17/2021 DW Travel T ravE:31 bctck to Ameli? ·1s1wid $425.po. 5.5 S2,337:5d Research, review, and'analyze Rl's memo of law; ()7/19/2021 ow Various motion for atty fE:3es, begin dr?fting responsive $425.00 2.!5 $1,062.50 memC> 07/20/202) ow Prall Drijift memo of law 1n suppor gf Am¢rided fliio.t1on $425.00 4:Q $1,700.00 for A.tty F~es 07/21/2021 ow Draft Complete 1st dra(t memo of law in support of $425.00 3.0 s1,275:oo. i?,rrierid9d m9t[o)l for a.tty'f¢'$s 07/21/2021 ow Meeting Meeting w/AIJ; re: memo of iaw $425.00 0.5 $212.50 07/2_1/2021 AIJ V~[iC>iJ$ Review and analyze memo of'law; meeting w/ $4,75.00 1.0 $475:00 DAW to discuss Complete and File Memo of Law; Meeiing w/ AIJ to 07/23/2021 ow Various discuss; call. to,JA; call to ClieI,t~·several emails· w/ $425:00 2:0 $85CLOO i:lpppsih!;l C:OUf]Sel 07/23/2021 AIJ Meeting Meeting w/ DAW, re: Memo of Law $475;bo d:5 $237.50 07/23/2921 ow E~mafl Email exchangew/ opposing counsel, re: $425.00 Q.2 $85.00 entitlement' hearing 07/23/2021 ow Teleconference Call to Judge Hafale's :JA, re: hearing date $425.00 0:1 $4250. Review Order Setting hearing for 7/27, review 07/26/202.1 ow Review'&, Analyze Notice of Appearance, review Order Resetting $425.00. 0.5 $212.50 Hearing for 8/17/2.i 07/27/2021 ow Various Review'email from Op. Counsel. & phone call $425.00 0:4 $170.00 07/28/2021 DW Draft Draft updated Memo of Law in support of Motion $42!5,0Q' 2.0 $850._0_0 for Attorneys' fees 07/29/2021 ow Draft & File Complete drafting and file updated Memo:of Law $425.00 2:0 $850:00 07/30/2021 ow E-mail Responded to Op .. Cour:isel!s email S425.0_0 0 . .1 $42.50 0_8/03/2021 ow Tele.conference Call wf client, re: wlines~e~·?fld plan fqr 8Ji7 $125:00 1.Q $425.00 tie_afing 08/04/202.1 ow Various s·everal timails & cali'w/.oppo$ing counsel ~ TC, $~25:00 0:7 $297;50 re: motion.to toriUiiue 08/04/202~ ow TeleCQriierer\9€ C_all w/ Client, ok to·file j9iht motion tQ toniinue $4"25.0Q 0:2 $85.bp 08/05/202.1 pw VariOL!S Emails w/ opposing counsel, re: Joint Motion io: $425.00 0:5 $212,5.0 Continue; review m9tion to continui;i 08/09/2021 ow Various Review .Order Granting Continuance and setting $425.00 0.5 $21250 ¢alendar cail for 3/4i22~~allaj c:lient 10,clistuss' 08/09/?021 PW Variotis CalLw/ Client; re: continuance until March 2()22; $425.CJQ Q,7 $29759 m~eHhg wj AIJ 08/09/2()21 AIJ. Meeting Meetingw/DAW; re: continuance $:175.00 0.5 $237:50 08/11/2021 ow Draft; & File Draft Amended Memo of Law ·10 comply w/ 1 O page .1 ... 3.0 $1,275:00 limit $f25.00 I Complete draft of Amemded Memo·of Law & filed; I 08/12/202.1 ow Various reviewed.and responded to several,emails w/ $:425.00 2:0 $850:00 9pp9sihg counsel ' 09/09/2021 ow E-mail Reviewed and replied to op. counsel's email $f25.00 0.2 $85:00 09/10/2021 ow E-mail Reviewed and replied to op. counsel's email Sf25.00 0.2 $85.CJO CA/AroPJt~!bP~At~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM 09/13/2021 DW E-mail Accept calendar’invite for 9/14 teleconference $425.00: i 0.1 $42:50 09/14/2021 DW Various TC w/ opposing counsel, re; multiplier 8 case law; meeting,w/AU. afterwards . 1. . $425.00 1.0 $425.00 09/14/2021 AU Various TC. w/ opposing counsel, re: multiplier 8case law; meeting w/ DAW afterwards $475.00 1.0 $475;00; 09/15/2021 bw Review & Analyze Review emails and case law from opposing counsel 1 . . $425.00, 1 0:7 $297.50 10/01/2021 pw Review & Analyze Review Clerk’s response to MSJ $425.00 0.5 $212,50 10/05/2021 pw Review & Analyze Review Order-, fe;:MSJ hearing oh 10/22/21 $425.00 0.1 $42:50 10/05/2021 PW Review-8 Analyze. Review Pl's Reply in support of MSJ $425.00 0.5 $212.50 11/02/2021 PW E-mail Reviewed several emails b/w opposing counsel $425.00i 0.2 $85:00 11/05/2021 pw E-mail Reviewed several, emails!b/w opposing counsel $425.00 0:2 $85.00 12/20/2021 DW Various Review 8 Analyze1 Final Judgment in favor of Clerk, meeting s/ AU, call client to discuss $425.00 1.5 $637.50 12/20/2021 AU Meeting Meeting w/ DAW, re: MSJ Order $475.00 0:5 $237.50 12'21/2021 DW E-mail Review email from Op. 'Counsel $425.00 0,1 $42:50 01/04/2022 DW Review Review Clerk's Motion to Amend Final Judgment $425.00 0:1 $42.50 01/04/2022 DW- Review Reviewed Clerk's Notice.of Appearance $425.00 o.i $42.50 01/12/2022 PW E-mail Reviewed and replied to email from Op. Counsel $425.00 0.2 $85.00 01/19/2022 PW Review 8 Analyze Reviewed and replied to email from Op. Counsel $425.00 0:5 $212.50 01/26/2022 PW Review Review Notice of Withdrawing Motion to: Amend FJ $425.00: 0:1 $42.50 01/26/2022 DW E-mail Emailed Clerk's Motion for Sanctions to Client $425.00 0:.1 $42.50 01/27/2022 bw: Review Review Pl’s Notice of Appeal $425.00 0.1 $42:50 01/28/2022 PW Review Reviewed 4bcA Order, re: abeyance $425.00 0.1 $42.50 02/24/2022 PW Various Review and analyze Pl's Respone in Opposition to Aronberg Memo of Law & Motion for Atty Fees;: meeting w/ AlJ to'discuss $425.00 1.5 $637:50 02/24/2022 AU Meeting Meeting w/ DAW, re: Pl's memo' $475.00 0.5 $237.50 03/01/2022 PW Various’ Review and reply to email from op..counsel, re: availability from 3/14 - 5/20; call w/client; callw/ expert $425.00 1.0 $425.00 03/02/2022 DW Teleconference Call w/Client, re: upcoming hearing on 3/4 $425.00 0:5 $212.50 03/02/2022 DW Meeting Meeting wZ AlJ, re: hearing in Palm Beach $425.00 0:5 $212.50 03/02/2022 AU Meeting Meeting w/ DAW, re: hearing in Palm Beach $475.00 0.5 $237.50 03/03/2022 DW E-mail Reviewed and replied to email from opposing counsel $425.00 0.2 $85.00 03/03/2022 Pw Travel Travel to West Palm Beach $425.00 8,0 $3,400,00 03/04/2022 pw Various Attend hearing’, meet w/ opposing counsel, call to: Client, re: hearing date 4/26 and set follow-up call w/ Client $425.00 1 2:5 $1,062.50 03/04/2022 pw Travel Travel back to Amelia Island $425.00 f - - - - 5.5 $2,337.50 03/08/2022 pw Various Call w/ Client, re: upcoming hearing, experts, plan; Meeting w7 AM $|25.00 1,0 $425.00 03/08/2022 AU Meeting Meeting w/ DAW-, re: trip to Palm Beach $475.00 0:5 $237.50 03/10/2022 PW E-mail Reviewed and replied to email form Clerk's counsel $ 125.00 0:2 $85.00 CWArop^O^^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY 09/13/2021 ow E-mail Accepl'calendar'invite for 9/i 4 teleconference $425'.00 0.1 $42:50. I TC w/opposing counsel, re: multiplier & case law; I. $425.Cl0 09/14/202i ow Various $425.00 1.0 meeting, w/AIJ. afterwards• I TC. w{opposing counsel, re::multiplier & case law; I 09/14/2021 AIJ Various $475.00 t.0 $475,00 meeting w/ DAW afterwards • I ·09115/202.1 Review emails and case law from opposing I 0:7 $297~50 ow Review & Analyze $425.()0 counsel I 10/01/2021 ow. Review &,Aqal~ze Revievv Clerk'sresp917s~ to M~ $425.00 0.5 $212.50 1 Q/05/2021 ow Review Bi.fnalyze Reliie~ Order, re: MSJ heating oh 1 Qi22/21 $425.Q0 Q.1 $42:50 10/,05/2021 ow Reiiiew08i,An~yz~ Review Pi's'R¢ply in s1,1ppqrtofMSJ $425.00 0.5 $212:so 11/02/2021 ow E-mail Reviewed severalemails b/w opposing, counsel $425.00 0.2 $85:o·o 11/05/2021 ow E-mail Reviewed several emails•b/wopposing counsel $425.00 0,2 $85.00 12/2()/2021 ow Various Review & .Analyze'.Final Judgmentin favor of Clerk; meeiing·w/AIJ; call client to discuss $425.00 l.5 $637:50 12/20/2021 AIJ Meeting Meeting;w/ DAW, re:MSJ Order $475;00 0;5 $237.50 1_2/21/~021 pW E:rnail Revi~w email ftom op. tqur(sei $425.00 0.1 $42:~0 01/0412622 ow Review Review Clerk's Motion .to Amend Final Judgrheni $425.Clci 0:1 $42.50 o 1 io4/20·22 DW Review· Reviewed ClerK's Notice.of Appearance $425.()() 0.1 $42.50 01/12/2022 ow E-mail Reviewed and replied fo email from Op. Counsel $425'.00 0.2 $85.00' 01/19/2022 ow Review &.Analyze Reviewed and replied io email from Op. Counsel $425.00 0:5 $212:50 01/26/2022 ow Review Review Notice of Withdrawing Motion to Amend FJ $425.00 0.1 $42.50 01/26/2022 ow E0mail Ema.iled CJerk's Mqtion for Sanctior:is to Cli~nt $425.0Q 0:.1 $42:50 ()1/27/2022 ow Review Review F% Nqti9e .of ,Appeal $425.00 0.1 $42:~0 ()1/28/2022 bw Review Reviewed 4ocA Order, re: abeyance $425.()0 ci.1 $42.50 Review and analyze Pl's Respone in Opposition to 02i24/2022 ow Various Aronberg Memo of'Law & Motion for Aity Fees;: $425.00 1.5 $637:50 mee\ing·wt AiJ to· qis9u~s 02/24/2022 AIJ Meeting Meetingw/ DAW, re:Pl's memo· $475.0() 0;5 $237:5() ()3/01/2022 ow Various Review and reply to email from op .. counsel,.re: availability from 3/14 - 5/20; call WI client; call wt' $425:oo 1.6 $425.00 E§ifpert ' 03/02/2022 ow Teleconference CallW/ Client, re: upcoming hearing on 3/4 $125.00 o:5 $212.50 03/02/2()22 ow Meeiing Meeting w/ AIJ, re: 'hearing in Palm Beach $425.00 0:5 $212.50 03/02/2022 AIJ Meetir:ig Meeting w/ DAW, re: hearing in Palm Beach $475:00 0.5 $237:50 03/03/2022 ow E-mail Reyieweid and replied to ~mail from oppiisirig $~25.00 0.2 $85.00 counsel . 03103/2022 ow Travel Trav~I to Wesr Palm Beach $-:125.0_0 8,0 $3,400.00 Attend he~r,ng. meetw/6ppoi:)ing counsei, ca.Ii to ()3/04/_20?2 QW V~riqus 91ient; r.i3: hEl?r[ng dat~A/26 a[id S:~t follovv;up ~U $f25.00 2,5 $1,062.50 w/Client I I 03/04/2922 ow Travel Trav~I baq{ to Ameiia lsiahd $~25.QO 5.5 $2,337.50 Callw/ Client, re: upcoming he?fing, experts, plan; I 03/08/2022 ow Various Meeting wt AIJ $f25.00 1.0 $425.00 ! 03/08/2()22 AIJ Meeting Meetingw/ DAW, re: trip to PaimBeach $175.0Q 0:5 $237.50 Reviewed and replied to email form Clerk's counsel I 03/ 1 ci/2022 ow E-mail $f25.00 0.2 $85.00 CA/Arop~~~}\1_,9M BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM 03/25/2022 DW Teleconference Call to expert witness, re: fees, updated affidavits, hearing date $425.00 0:2 $85:00 03/30/2022 DW Review Review Motion to. Withdraw $425.00. 0.1 $42.50 04/07/2022 DW Review Review-email from Op. Counsel $425.00 0.1 $42:50 totals: 161.1 $69,417.50 1 Expenses Date. EE Activity Description Cost Quantity Line Total 07/15/2021 DW Expense Gas $42.02 1:0 $42:02 07/16/2021 DW Expense The Ben'West Palm Beach, re: 7/16/21 hearing $557.46 1.0 $557.46 07/17/2021 DW Expense Gas $59.12 1.0 $59.12 03/03/2022 DW Expense Gas $70.41 1.0 $70:41 03/04/2022 DW Expense Hyatt,Place West Palm Beach/Downtown, re: 3/4 hearing $659.92 1.0 $659.92 03/04/2022 DW Expense Uber to Courthouse $6.51 1.0 $6.51 03/04/2022 DW Expense Gas $87.33 1.0 $87.33 Expense Total: $1,482.77 Time Entry Sub-Total: Expense Sub-Total: Sub-Total: $69,417.50 $1,482.77 $70,900.27 Total: $70,900.27 Amount Paid: $0.00 Balance Due: $70,900.27 CA/Arop^^^ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM NOT A CERTIFIED COPY • 03/25/2022 ow Teleconierence CalHo experi wiiness, re: fees, updaied affidavits, hearing date • • 03/30/2022 ow Review Review Motion to_ Wiihdraw 04l07/2022 ow Review Review·.email frorTl Op. Counsel Expenses Oat~ E~ Aj::_~vity De$¢_riptioo b1ti5f2021 ow Exp¢11Sl:l Ga~ 07/16/2021 ow Expense The Ben·west Palm Beach, re: 7/i 6/21. hearing 07/17/2021 ow Expense Gas 03/03/2022 ow Expense Gas 03/04/2022 ow Expense f-!ya_ttPlac_e.W~s! PaJ.m B~achfOoWritQ\Y/1, w ;3/4 hearing_ 03/04/2022 ow Expense Uber io Courthouse 03/.04/2022 ow Expense Gas . l $425.00 0:2 I $425.00 0.1 I $425.00 I - 0.1 Totals: 161.1 i c'.:ost Q_uc:1ntity $42.02 ro $557A6 td $59.12 ·1:0 $70A1 1.0 $659.92 1.0 $6.51 1.0 $87.33 1.0 Expense Total: Time Entry'Sub-Total: .Expeose $u~,Tqtai: Sub-Total: Total: Amount Paid: Balance Due: $8;i:OO $42.50 $42:50 $69,417.50. Lit,~ Tbtsil $42:92 $557.46 $59.12 $70.41 $659.92 ·$6.51 $87.33: Sf,482.77 $69,417.50 $1,482.77 $70,900.27 $70,900:27 $0.00 $70,900;27 . I CA/Arol_:)~~9,~~ BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3/27/2023 4:20:48 PM

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page

No text available for this page