Mon 10 Jan 2022 22 11 48 0000 Re Question 17E460C5 2¶

Thanks, Sarah. Have you formally retained Richard? If so, I will forward a draft of our answer so he can start on the counter-claims.


[cid:image001.png@01D80645.02194430]
Lucy Aquino<http://Lucy.Aquino@swiftcurrie.com/>
404.888.6202<tel:404.888.6202>
NOTICE:  This email message and all attachments may contain legally privileged and confidential information intended solely for the addressee.  If you are not an intended recipient, your receipt of this email and its attachments is the result of an inadvertent disclosure or unauthorized transmittal.  Sender reserves and asserts all rights to confidentiality, including all privileges that may apply.  Pursuant to those rights and privileges, you are hereby notified that you may not read, copy, distribute or otherwise use this message or its attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by email and delete all copies of the message and the attachments immediately.  NO DUTIES ARE INTENDED OR CREATED BY THIS COMMUNICATION.  If you do not have a signed fee contract or engagement letter with this firm, this firm does NOT represent you as your attorney.​

From: Sarah Zeeman <szeeman@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 3:57 PM
To: Lucy Aquino <Lucy.Aquino@swiftcurrie.com>
Subject: Re: Question

Very glad I have a recording of Friday,
I sent a thank you email for the meeting and the city guys have amnesia of everything we discussed.

The Dekalb county sewer easement violation is the main thing I'm trying to pursue now.
I sent them a FOIA and now figuring out how to submit a code violation ticket to Dekalb

My new lawyer for the counter is Richard Capriola
He is getting up to speed.

Please do not inform Rose law or Sally at this time.
Sally is not acting in my best interests.


Contact:
Winter Capriola Zenner, LLC
www.wczlaw.com<http://www.wczlaw.com>
https://wczlaw.com/attorneys/richard-j-capriola/<https://wczlaw.com/attorneys/richard-j-capriola/>
rcapriola@wczlaw.com<mailto:rcapriola@wczlaw.com>

404.844.5700
404.844.5637










On Sun, Jan 9, 2022 at 11:50 AM Sarah Zeeman <szeeman@gmail.com<mailto:szeeman@gmail.com>> wrote:
Please keep the knowledge of a recording completely confidential at this time.

I do not feel Sally Monico and the Title insurance is acting in my best interest,  please do not share this information with them at this time.
I'll transcribe it using word dictation when I have an hr+ to set that up and specify the voices in the recording. Unless you have the time available to listen to it.

The COB came to my property per my request to view the damage on Friday.
Key items include COB stating:

  “They didn’t build that extensions per the original plans” -he then said “let's state it in common terms - he got approved to build a deck and he got busted doing something beyond what he was allowed to do. That's all there is to it. He went beyond the scope of his permit...


 “Nothing wrong with a French drain, he did not submit calculations of the volume on how it would be processed. I suggested for him to move it further from the property line, with notes you can not put a drain system on a sanitary sewer pipe. Originally when they went through the approved plans through Dekalb it went beyond the plan when Dekalb approved it. He resubmitted this change and Dekalb was unaware of that. I reached out to Dekalb, here are the changes, and it's currently under review ....the question is with the actual sewer pipe itself is 18 inches vertical 8 feet horizontal - it's up to DeKalb's desecration if they will allow that encroachment of the easement.



On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 5:54 PM Sarah Zeeman <szeeman@gmail.com<mailto:szeeman@gmail.com>> wrote:

Thank you. So if I were to have had  an in person recording  of a 45 min conversation with 2 others but I am the one consenting…. a judge just has to confirm if it is admissible in court … <GRIN>


On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 5:44 PM Lucy Aquino <Lucy.Aquino@swiftcurrie.com<mailto:Lucy.Aquino@swiftcurrie.com>> wrote:
Hi Sarah,

Georgia is a “one party consent” state, so as long as one of the parties to a conversation has consented to the recording, it is not illegal to record the conversation. Typically, if you were a party to the conversation, you can be the “one party” who consented.  If you were not involved in the conversation, however, you would need to show that one of the parties to the conversation consented to being recorded. This applies to audio only – video recordings have different standards.

That being said, whether a recording is admissible in court depends on a number of other factors, in addition to whether the recording was obtained legally. Admissibility in court is subject to the rules of evidence and the rules of civil procedure and I would not be able to say for certain whether the recording would be admissible without knowing the contents of the recording. For evidence to be admissible,