The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2005-26057 Reso RESOLUTION NO. 2005-26057 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, RELATING TO PAYMENT OF LEGAL EXPENSES TOTALING $5,316.33 TO THE LAW FIRM OF JORDAN BURT INCURRED IN DEFENSE OF MIAMI BEACH CITY COMMISSIONER SAUL GROSS RELATING TO POTENTIAL LITIGATION OF LEROY GRIFFITH AND CLUB MADONNA; RECITING FINDINGS SUPPORTING SAID PAYMENT OF LEGAL EXPENSES. WHEREAS, on May 7, 2004, counsel representing Club Madonna served Miami Beach City Commissioner Saul Gross with a claim letter threatening litigation against him and his wife alleging, in part, defamation pertaining to statements made by Commissioner Gross in the course of his official conduct; and WHEREAS, Richard Ovelman, Esquire with the law firm of Jordan Burt responded to the subject claim letter, by demonstrating in part, that Commissioner Gross's statements were absolutely privileged because they were made in the course of his performance of official public duties; and WHEREAS, as a result of attorney Ovelman' s response, the subsequent complaint filed in the 11th Judicial Circuit Court named Mrs. Gross as a defendant, and not the City Commissioner, thus resulting in Ovelman's successful representation of Commissioner Gross; and WHEREAS, the City Commission hereby finds that the matters complained of in the subject claim letter concerning Commissioner Gross arose out of or in connection with the performance of Commissioner Gross's official duties and that the acts complained of further served a valid public purpose; and WHEREAS, the law firm of Jordan Burt defended Commissioner Gross in this matter, and has submitted to the City Attorney its invoice (and related documents) representing outstanding legal expenses in the amount of$5,316.33 (Composite Exhibit "A" attached hereto); and WHEREAS, the City Attorney has advised the City Commission that the legal expenses incurred in the defense of this matter were necessary and reasonable. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that: 1) Miami Beach City Commissioner Saul Gross has had successful defense representation with regards to the litigation threatened by Leroy Griffith and Club Madonna; 2) the matters which are the subject of the claim letter filed on May 7, 2004 by Madonna's legal counsel arose out or in connection with the performance of Commissioner Gross's official duties, and the acts complained of served a valid public purpose; and 3) the legal expense incurred by the law firm of Jordan Burt in the amount of $5,316.33 are reasonable and is thus approved for payment to said firm for services in successfully representing Commissioner Gross. PASSED and ADOPTED this 7th ATTEST: ~~ftU~ CITY CLERK David Dermer Robert Parcher F:\atto\OLIJ\RES-ORD\Saul Gross - Legal Expenses.doc APPROVED AS TO FORM & LANGUAGE & FOR EXECUTION ./J:J..1-QS- OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY ~~ efJldumi 11- F L o A o A MURRAY H. DUBBIN City Attorney Telephone: Telecopy: (305) 673-7470 (305) 673-7002 COMMISSION MEMORANDUM DATE: DECEMBER 7, 2005 TO: MAYOR DAVID DERMER MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION CITY MANAGER JORGE GONZALEZ FROM: =~~~~:IN~t\ ~ SUBJECT: INDEMNIFICATION OF LEGAL EXPENSES INCURRED BY CITY COMMISSIONER SAUL GROSS The attached Resolution provides for the payment of legal expenses in the amount of$5,316.33 to the law firm of Jordan Burt for Richard Ovelman Esq.' s representation of Miami Beach City Commissioner Saul Gross with regard to threatened litigation by Leroy Griffith and Club Madonna. Attorney Ovelman was retained to respond to a retraction demand sent by Club Madonna, threatening to sue Commissioner Gross and Mrs. Jane Gross for allegedly defamatory statements made by them concerning Club Madonna. The claim letter attacked statements made by Commissioner Gross at a City Commission meeting concerning legislation repealing a City Ordinance prohibiting alcohol and nudity at establishments. Attorney Ovelman's argument was successful because Mr. Griffith and Club Madonna filed suit only against Mrs. Gross. Accordingly, and in keeping with the common law of the State of Florida, payment of this legal expense is appropriate given that the Commissioner's conduct which served as the basis for the subject claim letter was in connection with the performance of his official duties and served a valid public purpose. JKO/ed F:\atto\OLIJ\RES-ORD\MEMOS\Saul Gross - Legal Expenses.doc 1700 Convention Center Drive -- Fourth Floor -- Miami Be~ Agenda Item C 7 G- Date I~ - 7-cJ~ jORDENBURT 777 BRICKELL AVENUE SUITE 500 MIAMI, FL 33131-2803 (305) 371-2600 FAX: (305) 372-9928 1025 THOMAS JEFFERSON STREET, N.W SUITE 400 EAST WASHINGTON, D.C. 20007-5208 (202) 965-8100 FAX: (202) 965-8104 October 5,2005 175 POWDER FOREST DRIVE SUITE 201 SIMSBURY, CT 06089-9658 (860) 392-5000 FAX: (860) 392-5058 Murray Dubbin, Esq. City Attorney City Attorney's Office, Miami Beach 1700 Convention Center Drive 4th Floor Miami Beach, Florida 33139 Re: Leroy Griffith and Club Madonna VS. Miami Beach City Commissioner Saul Gross Dear Murray: .. On May 7, 2004, Leroy Griffith and Club Madonna served a formal section 770.01 retraction demand on City Commissioner Saul Gross and his wife threatening them with a libel suit for statements allegedly made by Commissioner Gross in the performance of his official duties regarding a rezoning sought by Mr. Griffith, and by Mrs. Gross as a civic leader opposed to the rezoning. (Exhibit A hereto) . The undersigned, Richard J. Ovelmen, Esq., was retained to respond to the retraction demand. He researched and prepared a response which demonstrated that Commissioner Gross's remarks were absolutely privileged because they were made in the course of his performance of his official public duties. (Exhibit B hereto). This argument was successful because Griffith and Club Madonna filed suit only against Mrs. Gross. The Complaint against Mrs. Gross was dismissed by the trial court with prejudice. The parties entered into a Settlement Agreement in which Griffith and Club Madonna agreed to forego any appeal of the trial court's decision in exchange for Mrs. Gross's agreement not to seek attorney's fees from the plaintiffs. The Agreement includes a general release in favor of Commissioner Gross, as well as Mrs. Gross, forever precluding any litigation against gpmt:t:lissioner Gross or Mrs. Gross regarding the allegedly libelous statements. (Exhit.?it C hereto). Attached Exhibit D is a copy of the invoice in the amount of $5,319.33 for services and costs rendered by Mr. Ovelmen and the Jorden Burt JORDEN BURT LLP HTTP://www.JORDENBURT.COM ~~ JORDEN Murray Dubbin, Esq. City Attorney October 5, 2005 Page 2 of 2 law firm incurred in responding to the retraction demand. As noted above, the defense was successful because Mr. Gross was not named in the lawsuit, and he was subsequently given a general release. RJO/ma #142642 cc: Jean Olin E)(h).bif A LAw OFFICES OF' PABLO PEREZ, P.A. PROFESSIONA.L. AssCC1^ 'tJQN 3.11 S.W. z7fN A\f~NU;: F'lR5T FLOOR M",p,Ilr FLORIDA. 3313$ TE1..E:PHCNE (305) ~aaa f' Ae:s'..JL.E: (:;05) ~27!5 PABI.O 5=>>EREX., EsQUCRE ..1i;Ral....A. Wflr1RM@AOl..COM May 7, 2004 Mrs. Jane Gross Mr. Saul Gross 2900 Flamingo Drive Miami Beach, Florida 33140 Via U.S. Mail Certified, Return Receipt Requested - ... .. -.... . . .... 0- - 0 & . 1125 Washington Avenue Miami Beach, Florida 33139 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gross: Please accept this letter as a formal demand, pursuant to applicable Florida and Federal law, for a public retraction by you of the various slanderous and libelous statements 'and writings made by you in with respect to Mr. Leroy Griffith. individually. as well as Club Madonna ai1d its related corporations (~~The Corporations") , which statements include, but are not limited to, allegations that Mr. Griffith and lor Club Madonna and the corporations are in involved in the promotion of prostitution or its proliferation on Miwni Beach. Further, the false oral and written statements made by you and directed to Mr. Griffith and the corporations relate to-untrue allegan ons that :Mr. Griffith and! or the corporations are engaged in various other criminal activities. More specifically, your recently written email published to each member of the City Commission and thereafter circulated by staff to the general public falsely accuseS Mr.. Griffith of failing to pay certain amounts and failing to accurately report his income. Such statements constitute additional false allegations of criminal activity, which constitute libel and slander per se, with liability for such false statements automatically imputed by law to warrant the recovery of monetary and other d.amagcs aga~st you. - Be advised that Mr. Griffith and the corporations have already suffered actual damages~both in reputation and in busine$s, as a result of your aforementioned lib~l and slander. The law requires that you be given the opportunity to properly apologize) admit your wrongdoing and attempt to retract such libel and slander! Your actions and their repercussions leave Mr. Griffith and the corporations with no altcmative but to commence appropriate litigation against you in order to obtain proper vindication and damages. Pursuant to Florida Statutes section 770.01, this notice has . ~ been sent to you five days prior to the commencement of any such action. It is respectfully requested that you immediately cease and desist from your campaign oflibel and slander against Mr. Griffith, Club Madonna and the corporations. PLEASEGO\TERN YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY. -.. co: Mr. Leroy Griffith Mr. Robert L.. Roth Club Madorma Members, City Commission Miami Beach Gary Held Esq., First Assistant City Attorney Mitchell J. Zidel, Esq. LAW OFFlCES OF PABLO PEREZ, P,A. E1nl'b,.+ B JORDENBURT 777 BRICKELL AVENUE SUITE 500 MIAMI, FL 33131-2803 (305) 371-2600 FAX: (305) 372-9928 1025 THOMAS JEFFERSON STREET, N.W SUITE 400 EAST ~ASHINGTON, D.C. 20007-5208 (202) 965-8100 FAX: (202) 965-8104 May 12, 2004 175 POWDER FOREST DRIVE SUITE 201 SIMSBURY, CT 06089-9658 (860) 392-5000 FA.x: (860) 392-5058 Via Facsimile 305-649-9275 Pablo Perez, Esq. Law Offices of Pablo Perez, P .A. 311 S.W. 27th Avenue, First Floor Miami, Florida 33135-2901 Re.: May 7, 2004 Letter Dear Mr. Perez: We have been retained by City of Miami Beach Commissioner Saul Gross and his wife, Jane Gross, to respond to your letter dated May 7,2004. In your letter you first contend that our clients made statements that "Mr. Griffith and/or Club Madonna and the corporations are involved in the promotion of prostitution or its proliferation on Miami Beach." You also claim that they have stated "that Mr. Griffith and/or the corporations are engaged in various other criminal activities." Finally, your letter asserts that an e-mail sent by Mrs. Gross "falsely accuses Mr. Griffith of failing to pay certain amounts and failing to accurately report his income." Before you file suit regarding these allegations, we strongly suggest that you consider the following points: 1. Our clients have not accused your clients of being involved with, promoting or proliferating prostitution, as your letter mistakenly alleges. Instead, Mrs. Gross has done no more than exercise her First Amendment right as a constituent of the government of the City of Miami Beach, to opine to its Commission that a "secondary effect" of the adult nude entertainment at Club Madonna is that prostitutes gather in the immediate vicinity because a stream of male patrons emerge from the establishment in an excited state that those prostitutes in the area may exploit. Her opinion is not actionable, not defamatory of your clients, does not accuse them of promoting prostitution, and expresses only a "secondary effect" that has been recognized by many courts, including the United States Supreme Court. See City of Erie v. Pap's A.M, 529 U.S. 277, 290-294 (2000); Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc., 501 U.S. 560, 585 (1991); Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc., 475 U.S. 41, 44, 50, 51 (1986). As Justice Souter observed in Barnes at 584: The type of entertainment respondents seek to provide is plainly of the same character as that at issue in Renton, American Mini Theatres, and LaRue. It therefore is no leap to say that live nude JORDEN BURT LLP HTTP://www.JORDENBURT.COM ]ORDENBURT Pablo Perez, Esq. May 12, 2004 Page 2 dancing of the sort at issue here is likely to produce the same pernicious secondary effects as the adult films displaying "specified anatomical areas" at issue in Renton. Other reported cases from the Circuit in which this litigation arose confirm the conclusion. See, e.g., United States v. Marren, 890 F.2d 924, 926 (CA 7 1989) (prostitution associated with nude dancing establishment); United States v. Doerr, 886 F.2d 944, 949 (CA7 1989) (same). In light of Renton's recognition that legislation seeking to combat the secondary effects of adult entertainment need not await localized proof of those effects, the State of Indiana could reasonably conclude that the forbidding nude entertainment of the type offered at the Kitty Kat Lounge and the Glen Theatre's "bookstore" furthers its interest in preventing prostitution, sexual assault, and associated crimes. Mrs. Jane Gross's opinion is absolutely privileged under the First Amendment and under the common law. See Beck v. Lipkind, 681 So.2d 794, 795 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); Morse v. Ripkind, 707 So.2d 921 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). Even if Mrs. Gross's statements were not absolutely protected opinion, which they are, her statements would be qualifiedly privileged under Florida common law as statements directed to a governmental agency concerning a public issue. See Nodar v. Galbreath, 462 So.2d 803 (Fla. 1984); Seropian v. Forman, 652 So.2d 490, 497 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Best Towing & Recovery, Inc. v. Beggs, 531 So.2d 243 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). 2. If you and your clients believe that the Commissioner and Mrs. Gross have stated that either Club Madonna or its owner is involved with the promotion of prostitution, they would take this opportunity to correct your clients' misperception and make it clear that Mrs. Gross was offering only the common: sense opinion, based on facts fully disclosed, that a "secondary effect" of nude dance establishments like Club Madonna is that prostitutes congregate in the neighborhood in which these establishments are located. 3 . Your letter claims that Commissioner and Mrs. Gross accused your clients of engaging "in various other criminal activities," but you do not specify what activities, what statements, when they were made, or to whom. Our clients have no idea as to what your letter refers, and they would like the record corrected to reflect that they have made no such unspecified remarks. 4. With regard to your reference to Mrs. Gross's e-mail concerning Mr. Griffith's tax problems, we have reviewed the e-mail in question, and the opinion of the United Sates Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, In Re: Larry Griffith, 201 F.3d 1389 (11 th Cir. 2000). Mrs. jORDENBURT Pablo Perez, Esq. May 12, 2004 Page 3 Gross's e-mail is an accurate report of the holding of that opinion. As such, it is absolutely privileged from a suit for libel as a republication of the findings made in a judicial proceeding, Della-Donna v. Nova University, Inc., 512 So.2d 1051 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987), and it is not actionable because it is true: Several other courts use a three-prong test to determine whether a debtor's failure to pay his tax liability was willful under ~ 523(a)(1)(C): whether "(1) the debtor had a duty under the law, (2) the debtor knew he had that duty, and (3) the debtor voluntarily and intentionally violated that duty." Bruner, 55 F.3d at 197; see also Birkenstock, 87 F.3d at 952 (stating same test as two prongs). Applying this test, we fmd that the district court did not err in affrrming the bankruptcy court's fmding of willfulness. It is undisputed that Griffith had a duty under the law to pay taxes and that Griffith knew that he had that duty. On the issue of whether Griffith voluntarily and intentionally violated that duty, the bankruptcy court, in addition to noting that both Griffith and his wife Linda were "evasi ve and lacked that ring of forthrightness reflective of an open and credible witness," Griffith, 161 B.R. at 734, looked to the traditional "badges of fraud" to determine that Griffith's conduct constituted a willful attempt to evade his tax obligations, id. at 733. The bankruptcy court's finding that Griffith's transfer of property to Linda implicated several badges of fraud, including being "an exchange to a family member, during a period of serious financial difficulty, for inadequate consideration," id. at 734, is not clearly erroneous. These findings are sufficient to iustify a finding of fraud and. thus. to support the finding that Griffith's conduct was willful. See Sternberg, 229 B.R. at 246 ("While a single badge of fraud may amount to only a suspicious circumstance, a combination of them will justify a finding of fraud. "). (emphasis added). Id. at 1396-97. 5 . We are further puzzled by your characterization of your letter as a notice pursuant to Section 770.01 Florida Statutes. Section 770.01 does not apply to defamation actions brought against non-media defendants. See Ross v. Gore, 48 So.2d 412, 415 (Fla. 1950); Zelinka v. America Healthscan, Inc., 763 So.2d 1173 (Fla. 4th DCA); Davies v. Bossert, 449 So.2d 418420 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); DeMolfetta American Sightseeing Tours, Inc., 450 So.2d 312 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). Even if it did, your letter lacks the requisite specificity. required for a notice under Section 770.01. Hulander v. Sunbeam Television Corporation, 364 So.2d 845 (Fla. 3d DCA ]ORDENBURT Pablo Perez, Esq. May 12, 2004 Page 4 1978); Gannett Florida Corp. v. Montesano, 308 So.2d 599 (Fla. 5th DCA 1975). Indeed, your letter identified no specific statements made by Commissioner Gross at all. 6. We would also note that Commissioner Gross was at all times acting in his official capacity as a City of Miami Beach Commissioner and therefore is protected by an absolute privilege from any defamation action for any statements he made concerning your clients or their request for official action by the City Commission. See Hauser v. Urchison, 231 So.2d 6 (Fla. 1970); McNayr v. Kelly, 184 So.2d 428 (Fla.), conformed to, 185 So.2d 194 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966); Johnson v. Earhart, 353 So.2d 874 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1977). 7. Finally, in light of these considerations, we believe a careful review of, and compliance with, revised Section 57.105(11) may be well advised prior to initiating any libel suit against our clients. As you know, the revised law now provides: (1) Upon the court's initiative or motion of any party, the court shall award a reasonable attorney's fee 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 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 not be supported by the application of then-existing law to those material facts. Please call me to discuss these matters at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, f(t:f~2!- RJO/nt #126487 EXh,.b,--f G SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT This Settlement Agreement and Release ("Agreement") is made and entered into by and between Leroy Griffith ("Mr. Griffith"), Club Madonna, Inc., ("Club Madonna"), Jane Gross ("Ms. Gross") and Saul Gross ("Mr. Gross"). The terms of this Agreement are as follows: 1. Settlement: a. Plaintiffs Club Madonna and Mr. Griffith agree to file a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice of their lawsuit styled Griffith v. Gross, Case No. 04-11708 CA02 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 2004) within five (5) days of the date this Agreement is fully executed. b. Club Madonna and Mr. Griffith agree not to take an appeal of the Order dated September 27,2004 dismissing the complaint styled Griffith v. Gross, Case No. 04-11708 CA 02 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 2004). c. Ms. Gross will not file a motion for attorney's fees pursuant to Section 57.105 of the Florida Statutes, nor any malicious prosecution suit . against Club Madonna and/or Leroy Griffith with regard to the claims made in the dismissed action or the Order dated September 27, 2004. d. The Mr. Griffith, Club Madonna, Ms. Gross and Mr. Gross agree to the general cross releases contained within this Agreement. 2. General Release bv Lerov Griffith and Club Madonna: In exchange for the promises contained in this Agreement, Mr. Griffith and his successors and assigns, and Club Madonna on behalf of itself and each of. its past and present divisions, subsidiaries, parents, principals, stockholders, partners, directors, officers, representatives, agents, attorneys, affiliates, successors and assigns, hereby waive, release and forever discharge, any and all complaints, claims, charges, demands, suits, actions.or causes of action, whether in law or in equity, whether known or unknown, asserted or unasserted that Mr. Griffith or Club Madonna have, ever had, may have, assert, or could assert at common law or under any contract, agreement, statute, rule, regulation, order or law, whether federal, state or local, or on any ground whatsoever against Ms. Gross and/or her husband Saul Gross, arising out of, resulting from, or relating to, directly or indirectly, any action, inaction, matter, thing, or event, no matt~r what, which occurred or failed to occur at any time in the past, from the beginning of time through and including the date signed below. In~lude~ in the claims, demands, liabilities, and causes of action being released by this Agreement are any and all claims for defamation, libel and slander, attorney's fees and any and all claims which Mr. Griffith and/or Club Madonna may have against Ms. Gross and/or her husband Saul Gross for either direct or vicarious liability as a result of the incidents and matters set forth in the action styled as Griffith v. Gross, Case No. 04-11708 CA 02 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 2004). 3. General Release bv Ms. Gross and Mr. Gross: In exchange for the promises contained in this Agreement, Ms. Gross and her husband, Saul Gross and their successors and assigns, hereby waive, release and forever discharge, any and all complaints, claims, charges, demands, suits, actions or causes of action, whether in law or in equity, whether known or unknown, asserted or unasserted, that Mr. and/or Mrs. Gross have, ever had, may have, assert, or could assert at cornmon law or under any contract, agreement, statute, rule, regulation, order or law, whether federal, state or local, or on any ground whatsoever against Mr. Griffith and/or Club Madonna arising out of, resulting from, or relating to, directly or indirectly, any action, inaction, matter, thing, or event, no matter what, which occurred or failed to occur at any time in the past, from the beginning of time through and including the date signed below. Included in the claims, demands, liabilities, and causes of action being released and discharged by this Agreement are any and all claims for attorney's fees, malicious prosecution, and any and all other claims for damages which Mr. Gross and/or Ms. Gross may have against Mr. Griffith and/or Club Madonna, their agents, employees, and/or officers, and all related or affiliated entities, for either direct or vicarious liability as a result of the incidents and matters set forth in the action styled Griffith v. Gross, Case No. 04-11708 CA 02 (Fla. Cir. Ct. Fla. 2004). 4. Non-Admission Clause: Ms. Gross and/or Mr. Gross do not admit any liability whatsoever to Mr. Griffith and/or Club Madonna or any other person arising out of any claims which have been asserted in this litigation, or which could have been asserted, and expressly deny any and all such liability. Mr. Griffith and/or Club Madonna do not admit any liability whatsoever to Ms. Gross and/or Mr. Gross regarding any claims the Gross's could assert and expressly deny any and all such liability. 5. Other Proceedinf!s: Mr. Griffith and Club Madonna warrant that this matter is the only pending lawsuit or claim that they have, or have filed, against Ms. Gross or Mr. Gross. 6. Voluntariness: The parties hereby affrrm and acknowledge that they have read the foregoing Agreement, have been advised by their attorneys regarding its terms, and that they fully understand the meaning of the terms of this Agreement, and that this Agreement is a voluntary, full and fmal compromise, release and settlement of all claims, demands, injuries, damages, actions or causes of action, known or unknown, occurring prior to the execution of this Agreement. 7. Final Settlement: This Agreement constitutes. the complete understanding of the parties hereto and supersedes any and all prior agreements, promises, representations, or inducements, whether oral or written, concerning its subject matter. No promises or agreements made subsequent to the execution of this Agreement by the parties shall be binding unless reduced to writing and signed by authorized representatives of tl?-e parties. 8. I Counterparts: This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original, and all of which shall constitute a single Agreement. 9. Governinf! Law. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. The parties agree that if any dispute arises regarding a breach and/or the interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement, such dispute will be resolved in the Florida courts, and that the prevailing party will be entitled to recover all costs and attorney's fees incurred in any such proceeding. 10. Execution bv Authorized Representative: The person whose signature appears below on behalf of Club Madonna Inc., states under oath that he has full authority to execute this document and thereby bind the Corporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto knowingly and voluntarily executed this Agreement as of the date set forth below. [TillS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALL Y] JANE GROSS By: Date: STATE 0 FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF#I\In:~) SAUL GROSS SaJ~ By: Saul Gross, Individually Date: STATE OF FLORIDA ~ COUNTY OF f1t1rl1"ft 0 ~ The foregoing instrument was The foregoing instrument was executed ~ this ~ exec~ore me this ~y day of , of 2005, by 2005, by Jane s, who is Saul Gross, who is personally personally known by me [or known by me [or who has who has produced as produced as identification] and identification] and who took an who took an oath. oath. ~~ Notary Public I '-::- State of Florida at Large 'if: :=00212I7I BJ;t~~i-~~ Type or Print Name of Notary My Commission Expires: 133236 The foregoing instrument was executed before me this i day of JUNe:.. 2005, by Leroy Griffith, who is personally known by me [or who has produced as identification] and who took an oath. fi{p 1- G<o I ? '51...;~ ~'J-I 0 ~ D . ~,\\,"Ull 111'",1. ~\,,\ ()~ C. THO ~/,;,~ ~" f:>\) ........ ~A ~ ~ ...~~\SSION ~... O'o~ ~C.... ..,cp rl$ ~..~~ -.; . -... '~ ~ e. ~ I: ' ~ ~ ~ = ..... .*= Notary Public ~~ ~ #DO 060597 j ~~ S fFI'd '::r'~_ · ~~ tate 0 on a at ~~~,:?,~edt\\~~\.q.(o...~~ ~'. to/:.. 'Yblic Unde. .. ~ <(v..~ ?, vB. ...... 0.... ~' "11/ lie STA1't. ~\,\. . 11(l/imH"'\\\' fl;I'/SA@1,; C. 7/trf!f(J~1 Type or Print Name of Notary Type or Print Name of Notary My Commission Expires:~~ J;;xt)'M.y Commission Expires: ~~~ Notary Public StateJ1!)4.pfRJ!Aa9t ~ · ~j t.ti~'bD212171 ~OI':I ExpnIMly14.D1 '&^~C .~-k~ ....- Date: 9 $1113- ;J..Dih STATE OF FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF r1J~\ )+V~ ) "'" Jorde'n Burt LLP E: 1- h ,Obi-/- D Washinaton. DC 1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W. Suite 400 East Washington, DC 20007-5'208 Phone: (202) 965-8100 Facsimile: (202) 965-8104 Miami. FL 777 Brickell Avenue, Suite 500 Miami, FL 33131-2803 Phone: (305) 371-2600 Facsimile: (305) 372-9928 http://www.jordenusa.com Federal Identification Number: 65-0019093 Please Remit Payment to Miami, FL Simsburv. CT 175 Powder Forest Drive, Suite 201 Simsbury, CT 06089-9658 Phone: (860) 392-5000 Facsimile: (860) 392-5058 City of Miami Beach Murray Dubbin, City Attorney Miami Beach 1700 Convention Ctr. Dr. 4 FIr. Miami Beach, FL 33139 August01,2004 Client: 010932 Matter: 000011 Invoice #: 547206 Page: RE: General For Professional Services Rendered Through July 31,2004 SERVICES Date Atty Description of Services Hours 05/10/2004 RJO Telephone conference with M. Dubbiri; read fax regarding 1.3 slander; begin research. 05/11/2004 RJO Research, draft and fax to M. Dubbin and Mr. Gross draft 6.2 letter in response to retraction demand. 05/11/2004 EDA' Research various issues for libel matter; revise and edit draft 4.7 letter in response to retraction demand. 05/11/2004 JXP Assist with response to Pablo Perez's 05/07/04 2.3 correspondence. Substantive of case law construing FI. Stat. 770.01. Proof edits to response. 05/12/2004 RJO Telephone conference with M. Dubbin; telephone conference 1.1 with M. Gross; finalize letter to P. Perez; fax and same same. 05/12/2004 iEDA Analysis of new libel matter regarding Club Madonna and 0.2 Leroy Griffith. Professional Services 19.8 $6,501 .00 Less Special Rate Discount ($1,197.00) Total Professional Services Due $5,304.00 ATTORNEY SUMMARY Atty RJO Richard J. Ovelmen Hours 12.6 Rate $395.00 Amount $4,977.00 August 01, 2004 Client: ' 010932 Matter: 000011 Invoice #: 547206 Page: 2 EDA JXP COSTS Enr1que D. Arana John 'M. Pantin Date Description of Costs 06/04/2004 Photocopy Total Costs Professional Services Less Special Rate Discount Total Professional Services Due Total Costs Total Current Charges PAY THIS AMOUNT 4.9 2.3 $250.00 $130.00 $6,501.00 ($1,197.00) . $5,304.00 $12.33 $1,225.00 $299.00 Amount $12.33 $12.33 $5,316.33 $5,316.33