THE FLORIDA BAR 651 Bast JerveRson STREET JOHN F. HARKNESS, JR. ‘TALLAMIASSEE, FL 32399-2300 850/561-5600 October 11, 2007 Mr. James Stevens Nettles 5644 Doolittle Road Jacksonville, FL 32254 Re: Richard Roembheld Thames; The Florida Bar File No. 2008-00,041 (4B) Frederick Dyer Page; The Florida Bar File No. 2008-00,042 (4D) Bradley Robert Markey; The Florida Bar File No. 2008-00,043 (4B) Dear Mr. Nettles: All documents and correspondence submitted in the above-referenced matters were carefully reviewed. When The Florida Bar undertakes a disciplinary action against an attorney, Bar counsel must analyze the complaint and the supporting evidence from the standpoint of whether or not, as a prosecutorial agency, the case stands a reasonable chance of being won if litigated. One of the considerations Bar Counsel must weigh in deciding whether to close a file or proceed further to seek disciplinary measures is the weight of the available evidence. If the Bar seeks to discipline the lawyer, it is required by Supreme Court ruling to show, by “clear and convincing” evidence that there has been a violation of one or more of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar. Clear and convincing evidence has been defined as “evidence so clear, direct and weighty and convincing as to enable [the factfinder] to come to a clear conviction, without hesitancy, of the truth of the precise facts in issue.” This burden of proof is heavier than the burden of proof required in an ordinary civil trial. In cases where discipline is indicated, the disciplinary action is taken against the attomey’s licensure, and will not affect or overturn the outcome of any civil proceeding, To that end, The Florida Bar is not the correct forum in which to re-try your lawsuit. The Bar is not authorized to intervene in civil litigation and thus may not re-open cases that have already been decided in civil court. Further, the Bar is not authorized to second guess the judicial branch regarding decisions made during the course of litigation. In respect to the evidentiary matters raised in your complaints against all of the above- referenced attorneys including, but not limited to, obstruction of justice, concealment and/or propagation of false testimony, making false statements to the court, fraud and/or misrepresentation regarding the production of certain exhibits, (je., Exhibit 359), and propagating the false testimony of Mr. Libera about the images found on some exhibits,Mr. James Stevens Nettles October 11, 2007 Page Two Judge Adams carefully weighed the evidence and ruled on the objections made by your attomeys at trial, then re-considered the same issues when he denied your motion for new trial. The documentation provided in furtherance of this investigation does not reveal any new evidence that was not considered by the judge, nor does it otherwise provide a clear conviction that the above-referenced attorneys committed these offenses in violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Upon reviewing the relevant materials concerning your claim that Mr. Thames and Mr. Markey filed a frivolous counterclaim against you, then dismissed it before the summary judgment hearing, the evidence is insufficient to sustain a disciplinary action. Eagle Crest’s attomeys filed a multi-count counterclaim, of which two counts were dismissed prior to summary judgment. Both the Florida and federal rules of procedure permit the assertion of claims or demands for relief in the alternative. ‘The rules contemplate that proof of the clements of each claim may necessarily be developed through discovery. From the documentation submitted to the undersigned, it appears that Mr. Thames and Mr. Markey moved to dismiss the two counts timely based upon an inability to develop the case properly before the extended discovery cutoff. Upon consideration of all correspondence submitted, the evidence is insufficient to substantiate a finding that the above-referenced attomeys violated the Rules of Professional Conduct. Consequently, the inquiry is closed and the computer record will be purged one year from the date of this letter. Sincerely, Dace US — Shanell M. Schuyler, Bar Counsel Attomey Consumer Assistance Program cc: Richard Roemheld Thames Frederick Dyer Page Bradley Robert Markey