1. Let’s start with why are you not communicating during standard business
hours when you had weeks to do so?
2. Please forward me your email with the court from Friday as you claim.
3. It is 10pm on a Sunday night. This is inappropriate and unprofessional.
On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 9:47 PM Brett Ledermeier <bledermeier@mmatllaw.com>
wrote:
> Why do you not want me to tell the court that they can enter an order to
> expedite? Also, you are welcome to attend; it’s via Zoom.
>
> *Brett Michael-Schiff Ledermeier*
> 11625 Rainwater Drive
> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/11625+Rainwater+Drive++%7C++Ste+125+%7C++Alpharetta,+Ga+30009?entry=gmail&source=g>
> |
> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/11625+Rainwater+Drive++%7C++Ste+125+%7C++Alpharetta,+Ga+30009?entry=gmail&source=g>
> Ste 125
> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/11625+Rainwater+Drive++%7C++Ste+125+%7C++Alpharetta,+Ga+30009?entry=gmail&source=g>
> |
> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/11625+Rainwater+Drive++%7C++Ste+125+%7C++Alpharetta,+Ga+30009?entry=gmail&source=g>
> Alpharetta, Ga 30009
> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/11625+Rainwater+Drive++%7C++Ste+125+%7C++Alpharetta,+Ga+30009?entry=gmail&source=g>
> Direct: 404.365.4564
>
> Main: 770.200.7000
>
> bledermeier@mmatllaw.com
>
>
>
> [image: Image]
>
>
> 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:* Sunday, January 12, 2025 8:59:38 PM
> *To:* Brett Ledermeier <bledermeier@mmatllaw.com>
> *Subject:* Re: Why are there 2 hearings in two weeks?
>
> No. I will be attending and I do not want your unilateral suggestion
> tomorrow.
>
>
> —->>>Why did you not follow up with me on Friday and only the court?
>
> I do not trust a lot of what is going on here. I am not agreeing with
> your “Sunday night” shoving down my throat game plan- Emailing me 13 hours
> before court on a Sunday telling me to come to my own court hearing and
> dictating what I’m doing with no discussion.
>
> This is being mishandled on all sides.
>
> Miramar purposely told me the wrong court date and has ignored all my
> emails since.
>
> ->Sweatman does not get to dictate how a surveyor performs his job.
>
> I will be reporting the surveyor’s actions, emails, the on site
> recordings, and recorded phone calls.
>
> This situation is unethical and Sweatman’s council is not giving the
> transcript because they do not have them and they both of y’all did not
> have the transcript at the site visit.
>
> I recorded the site visit and will be able to confirm his council's
> unethical actions once I get the transcript
>
> It’s apparent, miramar failed to order the transcript in an adequate time
> frame after court …7 months later?? and Miramar from her emails continues
> to propose that I be represented in a blind fashion with a court order?
>
> No.
>
> I am not signing anything blind as Miramar is pushing for me to do so and
> will also be reporting her to the Florida Bar.
>
> DeKalb county cannot do a court order over Brookhaven’s zoning. There have
> been changes to Brookhaven’s codes and and this will be going back to
> Brookhaven as 3 properties are be effected by this.
>
> On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 7:41 PM Brett Ledermeier <bledermeier@mmatllaw.com>
> wrote:
>
> Sarah,
>
>
>
> I hope all is well. I just wanted to let you know that we followed up with
> the Court reporter again on Friday regarding the transcript we haven’t
> received. Tomorrow’s hearing is via Zoom and you do not need to attend;
> it’s merely a status conference. That being said, opposing counsel’s
> refusal to give us the transcript and, more importantly, refusal to tell us
> if they are trying to proceed with a variance appeal over a Court Order for
> the impervious surface issue will absolutely be brought to the Judge’s
> attention; I am sick of their games and delays and this hearing marks the
> perfect opportunity to ensure that there aren’t any more games moving
> forward. I will also make sure to have a proposed order regarding the
> impervious surface issue and I am willing to bet that we will have an
> executed Order on that by the end of the week. Technically, it’s not our
> place to make Sweatman decide between seeking a variance/appeal and the
> Court Order route, which is why we didn’t email the Court with the
> unilatera