Wed 4 Feb 2026 08 00 00 0500 Re Fw Sweatman V. Zeeman Judge S Order Approving Settlemen 19C28Bcf 2¶

Hi Brett,

For clarity and to correct a scrivener’s error in my prior email, the
reference to “Fulton County Court” should read DeKalb County Superior Court.

All other statements in my prior email remain accurate and unchanged.

Best regards,

Sarah Zeeman


On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 9:32 AM Sarah Zeeman <szeeman@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Brett,
>
> For clarity and to avoid any misunderstanding, no executed settlement
> agreement exists. I do not authorize the submission of any filings,
> motions, proposed orders, amendments, surveys, plats, or other
> communications to the Court, or any representations to the Court or third
> parties that anything is being submitted on my behalf or is under my
> review, without my prior written approval.
>
> For the record, I did not approve or authorize the prior closing of my
> court case (21CV9795) on or around March 17, 2025, the submission of any
> order, or the submission of any survey or plat to Fulton County Court or to
> the City of Brookhaven.
>
> As noted in my emails dated* December 1, 2025* and *December 18, 2025*, I
> am still awaiting the requested documentation, including communications
> with opposing counsel, the City, the surveyor, and the expediter, as well
> as any responses to the settlement edits I transmitted in June 2025. I need
> those materials before I can meaningfully review or consider any proposed
> order or next steps.
>
> Accordingly, I do not approve the proposed order at this time.
>
> Best regards,
> Sarah Zeeman
>
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2026 at 5:18 PM Brett Ledermeier <bledermeier@mmatllaw.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I apologize as I forgot to attach the proposed order with the redlines
>> from the City Attorney and opposing counsel.
>>
>>
>>
>> *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:* Brett Ledermeier
>> *Sent:* Friday, January 23, 2026 10:21 AM
>> *To:* 'Sarah Zeeman' <szeeman@gmail.com>
>> *Cc:* 'Jeff Banks' <jeffsbanks@hotmail.com>; Celeste Watwood <
>> cwatwood@mmatllaw.com>; Tania Tuttle <ttuttle@mmatllaw.com>
>> *Subject:* RE: FW: Sweatman v. Zeeman - Judge's Order Approving
>> Settlement and Plat Reconfiguration/City of Brookhaven
>>
>>
>>
>> Sarah,
>>
>>
>>
>> Opposing counsel just sent over a few redlines on the proposed amended
>> order approving the settlement and plat reconfiguration. Please confirm
>> receipt, review, and let me know if you approve the edits. This is just an
>> amendment of the prior order the Judge demanded last February and it is
>> what Gaddy, whom you requested, suggested to push through the plat
>> reconfiguration. It has now been more than 6 months and we are risking a
>> motion to enforce/contempt which I want to avoid.
>>
>>
>>
>> As previously stated, once we send the attached to the Court and the
>> expediter brings it to the City for approval, we can file a motion to
>> enforce and seek sanctions/fees. If we don’t move this forward, you are put
>> in a very risky position as the Judge made herself abundantly clear last
>> year at the hearing that we need to do everything possible to finalize
>> this.
>>
>>
>>
>> The expediter has been on hold for months. As for the City Attorney, we
>> have communicate via phone and simply waited on the amendments from him. I
>> also understand that you have been in communication with him claiming that
>> the FOIA/open records they provided were not in compliance. I’d ask that
>> you refrain from making such allegations to the City Attorney as, again, it
>> could hinder the resolution.
>>
>>
>>
>> Can we please schedule a call on this so that we can discuss and get back
>> on the same page. As you know, I have advocated for you every step on the
>> way. At the same time, we need to comply with the law and the Court’s clear
>> direction.
>>
>>
>>
>> This should be a top priority.
>>
>>
>>
>> If I do not hear back from you on the proposed order by next Friday, I
>> will still need to send it to the Judge and can note that it is under your
>> review. This is to protect you from any potential sanctions.