Skip to content

Mon 14 Jul 2025 18 04 35 0400 Re Closed Court Case 3 17 25 1980Af7E 2

Field Value
Category Correspondence > Attorney-Client
Confidence high
Reason [sonnet] Zeeman emailing Ledermeier about topography report responsibility
Original File mon_14_jul_2025_18_04_35_-0400_re_closed_court_case_3_17_25_1980af7e_2.eml
File Type EML
Source gmail-export
mon_14_jul_2025_18_04_35_-0400_re_closed_court_case_3_17_25_1980af7e_2.eml

Email

Header Value
From Sarah Zeeman <szeeman@gmail.com>
To Brett Ledermeier <bledermeier@mmatllaw.com>
Subject Re: Closed Court Case 3/17/25
Date Mon, 14 Jul 2025 18:04:35 -0400
Email Body
* Where is the signed and updated topography report? *
*This is your responsibility, not the policyholders'.*

On Wed, Jul 2, 2025 at 6:10 PM Sarah Zeeman <szeeman@gmail.com> wrote:

> *Brett - What did Gaddy say today?*
> * Where is the signed and updated topography report? *
> *This is your responsibility, not the policyholders'.*
>
> So, the Opposing counsel went around you, the title policyholder's lawyer,
> who had purchased the survey and emailed Gaddy without your knowledge. Then
> you waited a month, and *you completely omitted that it was the opposing
> party that did this when you partially** brought up that a cantilever** was
> added*, and only did this as it was the day you submitted it ,closing the
> case without my knowledge*.  *
>
> *Brett, you didn't respond to or address the title holder's confusion when
> you submitted this. *
> https://prnt.sc/iJXo5RPZ-iwT
>
> *How is this fiduciary?*
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 2, 2025 at 4:47 PM Brett Ledermeier <bledermeier@mmatllaw.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Sarah,
>>
>>
>>
>> As you are aware, I have not ignored any requests; you are copied on the
>> emails that date back to February. Further, I did not have Gaddy do the
>> revision or site visit; opposing counsel emailed Gaddy directly and the
>> correction was so that it was accurate. Further, the cantilever has no
>> impact on the boundary line.
>>
>>
>>
>> Finally, as previously stated, I did not file a case disposition form in
>> your case. The Order states that the case is administratively stayed.
>> Further, please see the below Uniform Superior Court Rule which,
>> presumably, is why the Court filed a case disposition form. With our order
>> stating that the case was administratively stayed, we did not submit a case
>> disposition form; the clerk or staff attorney must have per the superior
>> court rule. The case is settled and any motion to enforce the settlement
>> can still be filed; this is a non-issue for the matter given the settlement
>> agreement. I am hopeful that this email will put these concerns to rest. If
>> you have other concerns, please reach out to Jeff to ask for any clarifying
>> information.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Rule 39.2.3. Civil Case Disposition Form*
>>
>>
>>
>> Any order disposing of a civil action presented for consideration to a
>> judge by any attorney or party shall be accompanied by a completed civil
>> case disposition form. If the order is prepared or reframed by the court,
>> the court shall cause the civil case disposition form to be completed or
>> corrected, if necessary. The civil case disposition form shall be sent to
>> the clerk along with the relevant order to become part of the file for the
>> case. The clerk shall require any attorney or party filing a voluntary
>> dismissal or settlement of a civil action to complete a civil case
>> disposition form. The form shall become part of the file for the case.
>> The clerk shall use the specific type of disposition found on the completed
>> civil case disposition form to enter the specific type of disposition upon
>> the civil docket of the court, unless it appears to the satisfaction of the
>> clerk by an inspection of the order that the type of disposition has been
>> recorded in error. If the wrong type of disposition has been recorded, the
>> clerk shall correct the civil case disposition form and enter the correct
>> type of disposition upon the civil docket of the court.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Brett Michael-Schiff Ledermeier*
>> *Senior Associate, Real Estate Litigation*
>>
>>
>> *Mailing:  850 Windy Hill Road | Unit 1762 | Smyrna, GA 30081*
>>
>> 11625 Rainwater Drive  |  Ste 125   |   Alpharetta, Ga 30009
>> Direct:  404.365.4564
>>
>> Main: 770.200.7000
>>
>> bledermeier@mmatllaw.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
>> No attorney-client relationship exists by virtue of this communication in
>> absence of an engagement letter or fee contract. In addition, unless you
>> are in the To: or CC: line of this email, you are not an intended
>> recipient. The information accompanying this email transmission may
>> contain confidential or legally privileged information meant for ONLY
>> the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you
>> are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or
>> reliance upon the contents of this email is strictly prohibited. If you
>> receive this email in error, please delete this email and notify the
>> sender immediately.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Sarah Zeeman <szeeman@gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 1, 2025 8:00 AM
>> *To:* Brett Ledermeier <bledermeier@mmatllaw.com>
>> *Cc:* Tania Tuttle <ttuttle@mmatllaw.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: Closed Court Case 3/17/25
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Brett  - call Gaddys cell he wants to hear from you.
>>
>>
>>
>> He might want more money?
>>
>>
>>
>> You  blantantly* ignored the policy holders request for months* -
>> looking forward to you representing the policy holder since it is
>> your  fudicary responsibility verses telling the ho

Attachments

image001.jpg (image/jpeg, 4 KB)

image001.jpg

image002.png (image/png, 1 MB)

image002.png

Download Original (.eml)