Saturday, February 28, 2009

February 19, 2009

Judge Herbert Stettin
5401 Hammock Dr
Coral Gables, Florida 33156

Re: Lanson/Baron’s et al. v. Kopplow, Cooper, Salkin et al.
Case No. 21062 CA 15

Dear Judge Stettin:

The referenced case was before you, on a temporary basis, while Judge Mindy Glazer was on maternity leave, approximately between January and March, 2008. It remained with you when it was decided that Judge Glazer would not be returning to the Division and that the Division would be taken over by Judge Jeri Beth Cohen. During the period of time that you presided over the case you entered Orders. Amongst those Orders was an Order agreed to by all the parties entitled “Agreed Order Granting All Defendants Motion To Amend Their Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint,” a copy of which is enclosed, as Exhibit A, for your ready review. The Order was drafted by attorney Lauri Waldman Ross, your former law clerk, as Exhibit B confirms. I, as a Pro Se litigant in these proceedings, was one of the parties who agreed to the terms of the Order.

The Plaintiffs, Baron’s Stores, Inc., and Norman Lanson, represented by counsel, and me, in my Pro Se status, abided by the terms of the “Agreed Order.” The Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Strike the Defendants Affirmative Defenses as a Sham Pleading in a timely manner. The hearing on that Motion was scheduled to be heard on April 24, 2008 and was ultimately continued, by mutual consent of all the parties, at the time when Judge Cohen took over the Division.

Without going into all the details that surround this ten year old attorney malpractice case, you need to be aware that attorneys Lauri Waldman Ross, Charles W. Throckmorton, Robert M. Klein, Lewis Jack, Jr., and Reggie Sanger obtained the benefit of the bargain of the Agreed Order that bears your signature. Yet, the Plaintiffs were deprived of their benefit, by your signed Order, of their opportunity to be heard on the Sham Pleading. The attorneys then conspired by intentionally subverting your signed Agreed Order by failing to bring your signed Agreed Order to the attention of Judge Jeri Beth Cohen. By going behind your back, and concealing the Agreed Order from the Court, the Plaintiffs were deprived of, not only their benefit of the Order that was Agreed to and executed by your Honor, but were also deprived of their procedural due process rights as mandated under Florida Statutes 1.150.

The Plaintiffs have a trail of e-mail communications, Motions, letters and Orders imploring the attorneys, and subsequently Judge Cohen, to abide by your Court Order. Lauri Waldman Ross sat silent while Judge Jeri Beth Cohen was entering Orders in favor of the defendants, in breach of Court Orders, yours most crucially included, in violation of due process rights and ultimately obstructing justice (See Exhibit C – a letter dated October 27, 2008 requesting Lauri Waldman Ross to correct the record which she refused to do, and to this day, has never done).

These attorneys have a history, in these proceedings, of lack of candor towards the tribunal in order to gain unfair advantages on behalf of their “Attorney Defendant Clients.” This has been the way these attorneys and their clients have operated during the entire ten years of this litigation. I would never make such allegations if I did not have the facts and the law, and the evidence, to support my allegations. What I don’t have, and what the Plaintiffs, in this litigation have never had, is the “connections and protection” that the attorney Defendants and their counsel enjoy. I have the utmost confidence, Judge Stettin, that when you entered that Order you did so in good faith, and that your role, as a respected Senior Judge, was to insure that all parties would be afforded their due process rights pertaining to the Agreed Order that you signed. That is not what happened regarding your signed Order and that is certainly not what happened in the Lanson/Baron’s litigation. What happened was that these attorneys, in concert with Judge Jeri Beth Cohen, ignored your Order and managed to gut our entire case and have it dismissed inapposite to the law, to the facts and in violation of our due process rights. Judge Jeri Beth Cohen denied us discovery and a required evidentiary hearing. Judge Cohen and these attorneys have conspired to obstruct justice in the Lanson/Baron’s litigation, and thus far, have been successful in their conspired acts. All the Plaintiffs have ever sought was and remains an evidentiary hearing, which is required, so that the Defendants’ would have to answer to just how these fraudulent documents were obtained, used and ultimately filed in the court record to support Summary Judgment.

Plaintiffs filed an Affidavit from an independent fraud examiner, Michael G. Kessler, whom I retained, and who determined that the documents that the Defendants have relied upon have been altered, modified, tampered and thereby falsified. The Defendants have never re-butted nor refuted Mr. Kessler’s critical Affidavit. (See Attached Exhibit D – the sworn Declaration of Michael G. Kessler, which the Plaintiffs have made part of the Court record).

I felt it of utmost importance that you should be aware of the conduct of these attorneys, specifically Lauri Waldman Ross, who was responsible for drafting, forwarding and obtaining your signature on an Agreed Order, and then sitting silent in the proceedings while witnessing the subversion of your Order by Judge Jeri Beth Cohen. Lauri Waldman Ross has used her position as a JQC special counsel, and as a member of the JNC, to corrupt these legal proceedings in order to be victorious. Lauri Waldman Ross wields her power to protect unethical and illegal conduct on the part of attorneys and Judges and does so to the detriment of the unassuming public.


Meryl M. Lanson, Pro Se

Enclosures: As stated herein

Judge Jeri Beth Cohen
Lauri Waldman Ross, Esq.
Charles W. Throckmorton, Esq.
Robert M. Klein, Esq.
Lewis N. Jack, Jr., Esq.
Reggie Sanger, Esq.
Mary Alice Gwynn, Esq.
State Investigative and Regulatory Agencies
Federal Investigative and Regulatory Agencies

No comments: