Skip to content

Re Request For Documents And Return Of Communications 12

Field Value
Category Correspondence > Attorney-Client
Confidence high
Reason Attorney Brett Ledermeier responding to client Sarah Zeeman regarding document requests and case matters
Original File re-request-for-documents-and-return-of-communications-12.msg
File Type MSG
Source hdd-1
re-request-for-documents-and-return-of-communications-12.msg

Email

Header Value
From /O=EXCHANGELABS/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=1F4918A5604845759F64CD78928B4DF1-BRETT LEDER
To Sarah Zeeman
Subject RE: Request for Documents and Return of Communications
Date Request for Documents and Return of Communications
Email Body
Sarah, 



Which number are you dialing? I have no missed call from you. 



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 <mailto: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: Thursday, June 19, 2025 1:17 PM
To: Brett Ledermeier <bledermeier@mmatllaw.com>
Cc: Celeste Watwood <cwatwood@mmatllaw.com>
Subject: Re: Request for Documents and Return of Communications



Hi Brett,



Thank you. Brett, you have misspoken, as I called you again this morning at 9:31 a.m. ET, and I have my phone records that confirm this.



1. Yes, please send ALL requested documents today.  



2. The fence needs to be moved immediately, as it is not in compliance with the court transcript (pg 41). I've completed what I needed to do.



3. Yes, please include me in the call with the City Attorney, and on all future calls and communications, please confirm the call's time and dial-in #.



4. Who initiated the previous call you mentioned, of Gaddy/Plat Expediter +

City Attorney, please list the names of each and every party involved in the call and name all the parties that were aware of this call.



5. Why was Gaddy speaking directly with the City Attorney concerning my property, inserting himself in a Brookhaven citizen's private lawsuit, without my knowledge or notifying my lawyer, Jeff Banks?



After you've answered these questions, let's schedule a call before tomorrow's call with the City Attorney.















On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 10:18AM Brett Ledermeier <bledermeier@mmatllaw.com <mailto:bledermeier@mmatllaw.com> > wrote:

    Sarah, 



    I am happy to send you communications and related documents with the Court. As for the calls, Jeff and I spoke numerous times over the last two weeks; I am unsure as to why there is any allegation to the contrary. With regard to any call from you, I do not have a missed call or request for call. I have sent numerous requests to you regarding the settlement that have gone unanswered; those requests have also offered to set up a call. If you would like to schedule a call with me, please let me know your availability. 



    Further, I was about to email you as the City Attorney reached out after speaking with Gaddy/plat expediter and would like to do a virtual meeting tomorrow to discuss the plat and Court Order/case generally. I am waiting for the time confirmation and you dont need to be in attendance, but if you would like to attend please let me know. Essentially, the City is saying they arent bound by the Court Order, which we anticipated would happen, but the Court Order route was what Gaddy suggested and the adjacent owner chose that route over a variance appeal route, which was his choice, not ours. Despite that route, they might still need to go the variance route; it depends on what the City Attorney says or demands (we dont want to expand the litigation by involving the City as a named party). 



    Ive copied my paralegal, Celeste, hereto. As previously stated, I am happy to schedule a call with you. 



    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 <mailto: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, plea

Attachments

image001.jpg (image/jpeg, 4 KB)

image001.jpg

Download Original (.msg)