The North Shore homeowner, who is involved in various lawsuits against the HOA, was recently deposed by North Shore attorney Jennifer Englert. This is a brief history of three separate lawsuits against the HOA in which homeowner Lynn Sandford is involved. We hope it sheds light on why the HOA has had no option but to vehemently defend homeowners and itself against it.
At an open HOA Board meeting on August 27, 2019, Mrs. Sanford, who was apparently angry over the fact that a community manager she had befriended had chosen not to work for Access Management, the property management company Board had recently retained, accused Board President Dave Gordon and Board member Steve Smith of breaking the law by violating Chapter 720 of the Florida statutes. This is a very serious accusation and if true would damage both of their reputations and possibly cause Steve to lose his long-held CPA license. Shortly after that, at a closed board meeting, Lynn agreed to withdraw her statement and make a public apology at the next open board meeting but when given the opportunity to follow through with her commitment, Lynn had changed her mind. As a result, the other four board members voted for the HOA to file a lawsuit against Lynn. That lawsuit probably contributed to Lynn leading a group to file an action with the DBPR challenging the 2019 election, which has now become a lawsuit. Lynn also filed a $20,000,000 lawsuit against the HOA and several board members including Dave Gordon, Steve Smith, John Dick, and Mike McCauley (the four who voted for the HOA to file a suit against Lynn).
On January 20, 2022, Lynn Sandford was deposed by Jennifer Englert of The Orlando Law Group, who represent the HOA. This was as part of the ongoing lawsuits that she is involved in with the HOA.
We thought it might be helpful to provide a definition and some facts concerning depositions. The following are excerpts from a legal dictionary.
Deposition is defined as “The testimony of a party or witness in a civil or criminal proceeding taken before trial, usually in an attorney’s office”.
Deposition testimony is taken orally, with an attorney asking questions and the deponent (the individual being questioned) answering while a court reporter records the testimony. Deposition testimony is generally taken under oath.
Depositions are a discovery tool. Discovery is the process of assembling the testimonial and documentary evidence in a case before trial. Other forms of discovery include requests for production of documents.
Depositions are commonly used in civil litigation (suits for money damages or equitable relief).
Depositions commonly take place after the requests for production of documents because the evidence obtained from the documents provide foundation for the questions posed to the deponent.
Generally, at the outset of the deposition, the court reporter leads the deponent through an oath that the testimony that will be given will be true and correct.
The examining attorney begins the deposition and may ask the deponent a wide variety of questions. Questions that could not be asked of a witness in court because of doubts about their relevance are usually allowed in the deposition setting, because they might reasonably lead to admissible statements or evidence. However, a party may refuse to answer questions on the basis of privilege (a legal right not to testify). For example, statements made to an attorney by a client seeking professional services can remain confidential, and a client may assert a privilege against being required to disclose these statements.
The deposition, because it is taken with counsel present and under oath, becomes a significant evidentiary document.
INTERESTING ITEMS IN THE DEPOSITION GIVEN ON JANUARY 20, 2022
As noted on page 2
of the deposition Matthew Bernstein, one of Lynn’s attorneys was present for the deposition.
As noted on pages 5 and 6 of the deposition Lynn swore under oath that the testimony she was about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
As noted on page 13 of the deposition Lynn said that she is currently involved in three lawsuits with the HOA.
As noted on page 14 of the deposition Lynn previously served as an HOA Board member beginning in March 2017 and continuing through sometime in 2019. She also has served on the ARB, the social committee, and the communications committee.
As noted on page 17 of the deposition when asked about the original $20,000,000 lawsuit filed by her and Joe Doe and Jane Doe against the HOA and multiple Board members and committee members Lynn said that she provided some of the facts forming the basis of the suit and other people provided other facts used in that suit. When asked who the other people were that provided facts for the suit in which Lynn is the named plaintiff (the person suing the HOA and various board members) Lynn indicated that she didn’t know who they were.
As noted on pages 17 and 18 of the deposition Lynn stated that she didn’t know who Jane Doe and Joe Doe are even though she filed a lawsuit with them asking for $20,000,000 in damages from the HOA and other defendants. She indicated that her attorney, Bruce Burtoff (Bruce is also a resident of North Shore) did not tell her the real names of Jane and Joe Doe.
As noted on page 18 of the deposition Lynn stated that she didn’t know why that Jane Doe and Joe Doe dropped out of the suit after it was dismissed and then refiled. She also stated that she didn’t know who else provided information for this large lawsuit against the HOA.
As noted on page 20 of the deposition Lynn was asked by Jennifer how she decided which members of the Board she was going to sue. Lynn indicated that she did not decide but rather her attorney, Bruce Burtoff decided.
As noted on page 20 and 21 of the deposition when asked what Dave Bauer specifically did to be listed as one of the many people sued in the $20,000,000 lawsuit Lynn answered that she did not know and could not verbalize why he was included in the suit.
As noted on page 21 of the deposition Lynn stated she didn’t know why Dave Bauer was dropped from the suit after it was dismissed and refiled. That she didn’t make that decision, her attorney did without her knowledge.
As noted on page 22 of the deposition Lynn indicated she did not know what Bert Pearsall, Rob Taub, Randolph Pinna and Mike McCauley did wrong that caused them to be included in the list of board members that were sued in the $20,000,000 lawsuit.
As noted on page 24 of the deposition Lynn indicated that Steve Smith was named as a defendant in the $20,000,000 lawsuit because he committed fiduciary breach and financial malfeasance. When asked what the financial malfeasance consisted of, Lynn indicated on page 27 and 28 of the deposition that Steve asked a staff member to change the account coding on one invoice. Lynn indicated that she has a copy of that invoice that was provided to her by Lisa Mason who had been a CAM at North Shore while Lynn was a board member. As noted on page 27 of the deposition Lynn indicated that Steve committed fiduciary breach by acting as part of an executive committee that was not authorized by the board, making decisions, and preparing actions without board discussion.
As noted on page 29 of the deposition Lynn indicated that she did not know why John Dick was included as a defendant in the $20,000,000 lawsuit.
As noted on page 29 and 30 of the deposition Lynn was asked why she put her name on a $20,000,000 lawsuit against the HOA and several board and committee members if she didn’t know why they were named as defendants in the suit. She answered that someone told her that Bruce Burtoff was going to name her as a defendant in the case so she talked to Bruce and then he talked to another one of Lynn’s attorneys and they decided it would be better for the community if she was one of the plaintiffs (the people suing) instead of one of the defendants (the people being sued).
As noted on page 30 of the deposition Lynn testified that she only has documented evidence for the two people she thought should be named as defendants in the suit, Steve Smith and Dave Gordon.
As noted on page 31 of the deposition she indicated that the documented evidence came from email messages she had as a board member and text messages provided by Lisa Mason.
As noted on page 34 of the deposition Lynn said that Dave Gordon breached the Conflict-of-Interest Policy and the Vendor Policy and acted as an unauthorized executive committee.
As noted on page 37 and 38 of the deposition Lynn does not believe that any of the defendants engaged in self-dealing and misappropriation (two of the claims in the $20,000,000 suit) and she does not have any evidence supporting those allegations.
As noted on page 40 and 41 there is a claim in the suit that the defendants were negligent and reckless in the maintenance and repair of association property. On page 41 Lynn indicated that was referring to the replacement of the dock – that the replacement was unnecessary if it had been maintained properly along the way. Then she went on to say that she never thought about the maintenance of the dock during the two years she was a board member and she testified that possibly she did something wrong by not making sure that the dock was maintained during that time.
As noted on page 41, 42 and 43 of the deposition she said that Dave Gordon breached the Conflict-of-Interest policy by having a contract with The Orlando Law Group to represent him in all personal matters related to the Association. Lynn indicated that she has a copy of that contract and Jennifer stated that she will be asking for a copy of it because she has never seen it. Lynn stated that Dave Gordon also had violated the Conflict-of-Interest policy by allowing a woman who works for him to help with preparing invoices for one of the HOA vendors.
As noted on page 44 of the deposition Lynn indicated there were other Board members during the period covering the claims in the $20,000,000 lawsuit that were not included as defendants in the case. When asked by Jennifer why they were not included Lynn said that she didn’t know. When asked if she had any say on who was sued in the $20,000,000 lawsuit, she said she didn’t.
As noted on page 51 of the deposition Lynn indicated that she had read the first complaint (the $20,000,000 lawsuit) before it was filed. When asked by Jennifer if she agreed with everything in the lawsuit, she said that she agreed with the parts of the complaint that she provided to Bruce Burtoff.
As noted on page 57 and 58 of the deposition when asked how much money Lynn was seeking for the association in the $20,000,000 lawsuit, she indicated she thought it was around $500,000.
As noted on page 58 of the deposition when asked about the complaint against Dave Gordon repeatedly being engaged in clandestine and self-dealing contracts with contractors and consultants Lynn said that came from someone else, not her.
As noted on page 60 of the deposition when asked if she believed there was no oversight of the million-dollar budget Lynn answered that she didn’t know – that those were not her words.
As noted on page 60 and 61 Lynn said that she believed the Board diverted hundreds of thousands of dollars on wasteful projects. She then indicated that was on the dock. When asked for specifics she indicated that the gate on the walkway was wasteful and unnecessary but that she wasn’t part of the group that investigated that, and she hasn’t actually seen it and has no idea how much was spent on the gate.
As noted on page 62 of the deposition she did not provide anything about the sprinklers needing to be repaired. She also indicated that she has no evidence that the Board spent $100,000 to $300,000 on Covid protections or that they spent $40,000 on pillar repairs.
As noted on page 64 of the deposition Lynn stated that she has no discomfort putting her name on a lawsuit where she didn’t know where all of the information used to compile the suit came from.
As noted on page 65 of the deposition Lynn testified that she has not attended a budget meeting since she came off the board.
As noted on pages 65 and 66 of the deposition when asked about the allegation of comingling of expenses between board members and the HOA Lynn said that she does not have any information regarding that allegation.
As noted on page 67 of the deposition when asked, Lynn stated that she did not say that Dave Bauer was beholding to Dave Gordon even though that allegation is in the lawsuit.
As noted on page 68 of the deposition Lynn said that she does not believe that the values of properties in North Shore have been diminished even though that is one of the allegations in the lawsuit.
As noted on page 71 of the deposition Jennifer quoted one of the allegations that read “Tens or scores of homeowners have had their voting rights impaired”. Lynn said she believes that is true. When asked how so, Lynn stated that it appeared that a lot of fines were issued in a very short period from what she saw on social media and if you have an outstanding fine, you can’t vote. When asked if she knew the name of any person precluded from voting because of a fine Lynn answered that she did not.
As noted on page 73 of the deposition Jennifer asked Lynn if she knows who the defendants are in the amended lawsuit where she is the only plaintiff. Lynn answered that she does not know who the defendants are (she does not know who she is suing). She then went on to say that she has not read the amended complaint. Jennifer then told her that the only Board members left in the suit that she is suing are Dave Gordon and John Dick. When asked why they are the only two remaining in the suit she answered that she had not had a chance to discuss any of this with Mr. Burtoff and she didn’t know why they were the only two remaining.
As noted on page 77 of the deposition when asked if the allegations in the amended complaint are valid or not, Lynn stated that since she hadn’t read the lawsuit she does not know if they are valid or not. When asked why she hasn’t read it, she answered that she did not have time.
As noted on page 84 of the deposition Lynn stated that she does not have any evidence that the association is on the brink of insolvency.
As noted on page 86 of the deposition Jennifer asked Lynn what North Shore at Lake Hart Neighbors is. On page 87 of the deposition Lynn answered that it’s a Facebook group page. Lynn then indicated that she posts to this page. She also testified that the two administrators of the page are Angie Detwiler and Kelly Clavijo and does not know who started this page or when it started.
As noted on page 89 of the deposition Jennifer asked Lynn what she did to initiate the recall procedure. Lynn indicated that she spoke with an attorney and then she talked with community neighbors and asked if they would help. She then sent a postcard out to the community and organized a team to go door to door to get signatures for the recall.
As noted on page 90 and 91 of the deposition Lynn was asked who the leadership team of the recall effort was. She answered that it consisted of Dr. Mathison, Kurt Kuhl, Kelly Clavijo, Will Arwood and Tom Garland.
As noted on page 92 and 93 of the deposition Lynn indicated that the leadership team recruited people to go door to door and they had a meeting where the leadership team verbally conveyed the information of what to say to the teams going door to door.
As noted on page 97 of the deposition Jennifer asked if Lynn offered to either discount or allow people who assisted with the recall effort to not pay their HOA dues. Lynn indicated that she started a GoFundMe request to raise money to help with legal fees. She also stated that she offered anybody who contributed, that the new board would be able to give back their contributions by reducing their dues (assessment payments). Lynn indicated that at the time she made that offer she was not aware that she could not do that. When asked, Lynn indicated that she has not retracted that offer and even though she has made a personal commitment to pay everyone back out of her own personal funds, she has not announced that or done anything about it yet.
As noted on page 100 and 101 of the deposition Lynn acknowledged that she is aware of takebacknorthshore.com. She indicated that she has provided content for the website. She provided content to the court team which consists of Dr. Mathison, Kelly Clavijo, Will Arwood, Kurt Kuhl and Tom Garland but she doesn’t know which one of them codes the website. She also stated that she does not know who owns the domain for the website.
As noted on page 126 of the deposition Lynn agreed that she had no idea what people were out there saying when they were going door to door trying to get recall ballots signed.
As noted on page 134 of the deposition Lynn continues to talk to Lisa Mason (NSLH CAM from 2016 through August 2019) about the status of the recall and the status of the election arbitration.
As noted on page 135 of the deposition Lynn said she is personal friends with Lisa and has talked with her about coming back to NSLH as the CAM.
As noted on page 136 and 137 of the deposition Lynn admitted that she did in fact have written notes that she referred to or read from when she made the disparaging remarks about Dave Gordon and Steve Smith at the August 27, 2019, Board meeting (Lynn had denied several times in the past using anything in writing at that meeting) but discarded the notes immediately after the meeting.
As noted on pages 138 through 142 of the deposition when Jennifer asked Lynn what concrete evidence she used to form her opinion about Dave Gordon and Steve Smith she said that she had a conversation with some landscapers who claimed they had done some work for Dave Gordon and had not been paid and when she told them she a board member they asked her if she could help them get paid. Lynn assumed that they wanted her to have the HOA pay them for that work. Then Lynn again said that she has one invoice that supposedly Steve had instructed a staff member at North Shore to miscode. She stated that she asked two independent CPAs about the miscoding and they both told her in general terms without seeing the actual invoice that it would be wrong to do that. One of the CPA’s she asked was Brian Friedel (one of the plaintiffs in the Election Dispute lawsuit) and the other one was someone who worked at H & R Block.
As noted on page 143 of the deposition Jennifer asked Lynn if she recalled there being discussions regarding the hiring of Tracy where Lynn got to give her input. Lynn answered that she thought the decision to hire Tracy had already been made when Dave and Steve said they would send Tracy’s resume to Lynn and Lynn could talk to her (before a vote was taken on hiring her). Then Jennifer asked Lynn if she recalled voting on what Tracy’s salary and contract would be and Lynn answered that she did vote on that.
As noted on page 144 of the deposition Lynn admitted that Tracy was to be hired as a project manager, but Lynn thought the HOA was going to recommend to Access Management to hire Tracy as a CAM (to replace her friend Lisa) even though there was no discussion in the board meeting indicating that plan.
As noted on page 145 and 146 of the deposition when asked if the annual audit of the financial statements made Lynn feel better about the accuracy of the financials, Lynn answered no it did not because the issuance of the monthly statements prepared by Access Management took longer than they had in the past under Aegis and somehow this was Steve’s responsibility, that he purposely held them up from being issued.
As noted on page 147 of the deposition Lynn indicated that board meeting minutes are a better reflection of what occurred at meetings than her memory and she voted on these minutes at each meeting. Lynn also indicated that she remembered the preparation of the minutes were behind for a period of time, but Lynn said that was not Lisa’s fault (even though Lisa in her role as CAM was responsible for preparing them and presenting them to the board at meetings) but Lynn blamed that on Jennifer. Lynn said that Lisa told her that Jennifer had told Lisa not to prepare minutes but when asked why, Lynn couldn’t remember the reason for that, just that’s what Lisa told her.
As noted on page 148 and 149 of the deposition Lynn said there were three things that Dave Gordon and Steve Smith did that (in Lynn’s opinion) was conducting business outside of a board meeting. They were the hiring of Tracy (for a project manager position) even though Lynn admitted she had voted on the hiring of Tracy and what her salary and contract would be, the hiring of Access Management (even though she also admitted to having a discussion on this topic at a board meeting and voting on the decision to hire Access Management) and the firing of Lisa Mason. Lynn then admitted again that she understood that Lisa refused to sign the employment contract that Access Management offered her (which was the same contract they have every employee sign before starting work). Lynn then went on to say that she agreed to hire Access Management only if it included hiring Lisa Mason (as the CAM). Lynn then indicated that Steve and Dave said that “Yes, it has to include Lisa Mason”. Lynn then said that in the subsequent month it became clear to her that Steve and Dave did not want Lisa there even though Access Management offered Lisa a contract, but it was not the contract that Lynn and Lisa thought it should have been because it contained a nondisclosure agreement (Lynn was probably meaning a non-compete agreement which is standard in most management company employee agreements. This agreement said that if Lisa left their employment she agreed not to work as a CAM for any of their existing clients that Lisa might convince to leave Access and go to a different management company. In other words, they didn’t want Lisa or any other employee to convince a current Access client to leave and go to a different management company).
As noted on page 156 of the deposition Jennifer asked Lynn why she asked Dave and Steve to resign at a public board meeting. Lynn said that it was because they acted as an unauthorized executive committee. Lynn said that Steve had asked an employee to change the account coding on one invoice (that was an incorrect coding according to Lisa Mason) and Lynn suspected that if Steve did it once he did it other times (even though Lisa didn’t mention to Lynn there were any other times). Lynn then said that Dave did not disclose that Jennifer was doing personal legal work for Dave and didn’t disclose that his personal assistant was helping an HOA vendor prepare invoices. Lynn admitted that none of this is illegal but in her mind it is “unseemly” and violated conflict of interest policies. When asked by Jennifer if Lynn thought it was a conflict of interest for Lynn to talk to HOA employees (Lynn had previously said that she talked to Lisa about selling her insurance) about selling them insurance products Lynn answered that it was not a conflict of interest if they approached her about this and she would have disclosed it if she had sold them anything.
As noted on page 173 of the deposition when asked by Jennifer about an email sent out to the community in October 2019 from the email address electnewhoaboardagain@gmail.com Lynn again said that she doesn’t know who that email address belongs to. She did state that the email was put together by the core team which consisted of Dr. Mathison, Kurt Kuhl, Kelly Clavijo, Tom Garland and herself. As noted on page 176 of the deposition Lynn indicated that she drafted the body of the email and the other core team members added the bullet points. As noted on page 177 of the deposition Lynn stated that she doesn’t know who the email was sent to.
As noted on page 179 of the deposition Lynn now stated that John Baker was also part of the core team.
As noted on page 181 of the deposition when asked about a statement made in the email sent out to members of the HOA stating that all the questions submitted to be answered at the townhall meeting held in October 2019 were not answered, Lynn stated that she knew this to be true because she read it on social media. When Lynn was asked if she believes everything she reads on social media she answered that she did not, but she did believe these comments.
As noted on page 185 of the deposition when asked if anybody made sure that the information being sent out to the community in the email (sent by her and the core team) was correct she indicated that she didn’t know and that she did not make sure it was correct.
As noted on page 188 of the deposition Lynn stated that she has not attended any board meetings since she left the board (which occurred in October 2019). When asked why she said she doesn’t know, she doesn’t have a reason.
As noted on pages 200 and 201 of the deposition Lynn stated that she believes it is not the CAM’s responsibility to make sure that the common areas owned by the HOA are taken care of (maintained properly). Lynn stated that is it the responsibility of the board to request bids for this work to be done.
As noted on page 205 of the deposition when Jennifer again asked Lynn if Mr. Burtoff consulted with her before he filed the amended lawsuit (after the first lawsuit had been dismissed for lack of evidence) Lynn answered that he told her he was going to have to file an amended lawsuit and was she still good with having her name on it. She answered that she was and did not talk about what was in the suit with Mr. Burtoff. She then went on to say again that she doesn’t know what’s in the suit because she hasn’t read it.
As noted on pages 206 and 207 of the deposition when asked why the damages requested in the amended lawsuit went down so much from the original lawsuit (they dropped from $20,000,000 to $500,000) Lynn indicated that she doesn’t know how much the damages are for in the amended lawsuit. When asked if Lynn thought that was appropriate that she didn’t know the amount of damages that she is suing for she said it is appropriate because she is not the one who sought to file a complaint but rather it was Bruce Burtoff. Lynn said that he sought plaintiffs to file the suit and asked if anybody had records.
As noted on page 211 of the deposition Lynn admitted that she may have misspoken or said a few things wrong when she made accusations against Dave Gordon and Steve Smith at the August 2019 board meeting.
As noted on pages 212 and 213 of the deposition Lynn admitted that she doesn’t know what she said at the August 2019 board meeting and therefore doesn’t know if she should set the record straight if she said anything wrong.
It is amazing that Lynn is suing the HOA for $500,000 (originally $20,000,000) but hasn’t read the suit and doesn’t know why some people are listed as defendants and some aren’t or even what allegations are included in the suit. It appears to us that Lynn got upset in 2019 when her friend Lisa was asked to leave by Access Management (because she refused to sign the standard Access Management employment agreement) and has been doing everything she can including making accusations in an open board meeting against Steve Smith and Dave Gordon (the two people she thinks are responsible for Lisa no longer being here as the CAM), hiring a parliamentarian to attend the 2019 Annual Meeting in an attempt to take over that meeting and then filing a compliant with the DBPR about that election and then filing a lawsuit against the HOA to force the compliance with a DBPR Order that will likely be overturned and even filing a $20,000,000 lawsuit against the HOA and many other defendants including Steve Smith and Dave Gordon.
But we want you to make your own conclusion, so we have included a link to the actual printed testimony given by Lynn Sandford in the deposition. Please take the time to read it and form your opinion. As noted in the article in the last special Legal Edition of the newsletter, the HOA board instructed Jennifer on more than one occasion to reach out to Lynn and her team about settling all of these lawsuits, but they declined to set down and talk.