SUPERI OR COURT OF CALI FORNI A

COUNTY OF ORANGE, CENTRAL J USTI CE CENTER

DEPARTMENT C20
WESTERN RI VERSI DE COUNCI L OF )
GOVERNMENTS, )
)
PLAI NTI FF/ PETI TI ONER, )
) CASE NO. 30- 2010- 00357976
VS. )
)
THE CI TY OF BEAUMONT; AND DOES )
1 THROUGH 100, )
)
DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT. )
________________________________)
HONORABLE DAVI D R. CHAFFEE, J UDGE PRESI DI NG
REPORTER' S PARTI AL TRANSCRI PT
MAY 22, 2014
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL:
FOR PLAI NTI FF/ J EFFREY V. DUNN
PETI TI ONER: THOMAS J . EASTMOND
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
FOR DEFENDANT/ WALTER P. MC NEI LL
RESPONDENT: RACHEL L. MC VEAN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
KATHY D. HOFFMAN, CSR #5787
OFFI CI AL COURT REPORTER
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
SANTA ANA, CALI FORNI A - THURSDAY, MAY 22, 2014
AFTERNOON SESSI ON
( THE FOLLOWI NG PROCEEDI NGS WERE HAD I N OPEN
COURT: )
THE COURT: GOOD AFTERNOON, LADI ES AND GENTLEMEN.
ALL RI GHT. WELL, I HAVE TO SAY I ' VE BEEN
SCRI BBLI NG FOR THE LAST THREE HOURS. MY HAND ACTUALLY
HURTS AS A RESULT OF TRYI NG TO GET THI S I NTO SOME FORM THAT
I S UNDERSTANDABLE. AND SO I AM TO A DEGREE PROBABLY
LARGELY GOI NG TO BE EDI TI NG I T AND READI NG AT THE SAME
TI ME, OR READI NG AND EDI TI NG AT THE SAME TI ME, YOUR CHOI CE
OF ORDER.
WHAT I WANT TO DO I S THI S: I ALWAYS ANTI CI PATE
I N A CASE OF THI S NATURE THAT THERE WI LL BE AN APPEAL. AND
I ANTI CI PATE ALWAYS I N A CASE OF THI S NATURE THAT SOMEONE
WI LL REQUEST A STATEMENT OF DECI SI ON, AND SO UP FRONT, SO
THAT I DON' T FORGET LATER ON, I ' M DI RECTI NG THE PREVAI LI NG
PARTY, I F THERE I S A REQUEST FOR A STATEMENT OF DECI SI ON,
TO PREPARE A PROPOSED STATEMENT OF DECI SI ON AND TO ATTACH
TO I T AND I NCORPORATE BY REFERENCE A TRANSCRI PT OF THAT
WHI CH I AM ABOUT TO ENTER I NTO THE RECORD I N TERMS OF THE
COURT' S RULI NG AND FI NDI NGS ON THI S CASE.
I SHOULD START, AS I THI NK I TRI ED TO DO MAYBE
BACKHANDEDLY THI S MORNI NG BY TALKI NG ABOUT THE LACK OF TI ME
LI MI TS FOR THI S TRI AL, BY COMPLI MENTI NG ALL FOUR OF THE
LAWYERS I NVOLVED I N THI S CASE. NOT ONLY DI D I FI ND YOU TO
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
BE VERY NI CE PEOPLE, WHI CH I S ALWAYS A NI CE THI NG BECAUSE
SO MANY PEOPLE I N OUR SOCI ETY FI ND LAWYERS TO BE ANATHEMA,
BUT I ALSO FI ND YOU TO BE SCHOLARS AND EXCELLENT
PRACTI TI ONERS OF OUR PROFESSI ON.
MS. MC VEAN, I HAVE THE I MPRESSI ON YOU' RE KI ND OF
EARLY ON I N YOUR CAREER.
MS. MC VEAN: YES, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: I THI NK YOU HAVE GREAT PROMI SE.
MS. MC VEAN: THANK YOU.
THE COURT: APPRECI ATED YOUR BEI NG HERE, ESPECI ALLY
SI NCE YOU' RE CANADI AN.
MS. MC VEAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: AND SO TO THE OLD HANDS, WHI CH ARE THE
OTHER THREE OF YOU, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU FOR YOUR EXCELLENT
PRESENTATI ONS, ALL THREE OF YOU. YOU KNOW, OBVI OUSLY I N A
CASE OF THI S NATURE, SOMEBODY WI NS AND SOMEBODY LOSES, AND
THE CHI PS HAVE TO FALL WHERE THEY MAY. AND TO A DEGREE, AS
YOU WI LL HEAR, I AM GOI NG TO BE GI VI NG SOMEWHAT A PI ECE OF
MY MI ND TO A CERTAI N DEGREE AS WELL.
AND I T' S NOT ALWAYS EASY TO SWALLOW. AS
ADVOCATES, I REMEMBER THI S SO WELL WHEN I WAS A LAWYER ALL
THOSE YEARS AGO, WE ALL FEEL AS LAWYERS MORE THAN A LI TTLE
RESPONSI BI LI TY TO OUR CLI ENTS TO FI X I T, TO WI N FOR YOUR
CLI ENTS REGARDLESS. THAT I SN' T THE NATURE OF THE BUSI NESS.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, I AM TELLI NG YOU UP FRONT THAT I
APPRECI ATE YOUR ADVOCACY, AND I APPRECI ATE YOU AS PEOPLE,
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
I RRESPECTI VE OF THE RESULT OF THI S.
AND, YOU KNOW, BELI EVE ME, ALL FOUR OF YOU ARE
WELCOME HERE ANY DAY, ANY TI ME, TO TRY ANOTHER CASE. I
WOULD BE HAPPY TO HAVE YOU. YOU MAY NOT BE HAPPY TO HAVE
ME, HOWEVER. SO WE BEGI N, AND STRANGELY ENOUGH, I WAS TOLD
A LONG TI ME AGO NEVER PUT YOURSELF I NTO A DECI SI ON OR
OPI NI ON, AND YET I ' M ABOUT TO DO THI S BY SAYI NG THI S:
I AM AN OLD, EMPHASI S ON THE WORLD " OLD, "
COLLEGI ATE OARSMAN. PERHAPS YOU HAVE SEEN THE MOTI VATI ONAL
POSTER SHOWI NG AN EI GHT- OARED RACI NG SHELL I N ACTI ON ON THE
WATER UNDER THE HEADI NG OR TI TLE OF " TEAMWORK. " THERE I S
SOMETHI NG SI MPLE BUT ELEGANT ABOUT A SPORT WHERE NI NE
PEOPLE CLI MB I NTO A 60- FOOT LONG, BY 24- TO 32- I NCH WI DE,
200- POUND RACI NG SHELL, AND AFTER LONG ARDUOUS WEEKS,
I NDEED, MONTHS OF TRAI NI NG, LI NE UP ON THE STARTI NG LI NE TO
ACHI EVE A SI NGLE PURPOSE, TO BEAT ALL CHALLENGERS OVER A
2, 000 METER COURSE.
WHAT' S REQUI RED I N THI S? STRENGTH, SKI LL ON THE
PART OF EVERY PERSON I N THE BOAT, BUT AT THE END OF THE
DAY, ALL THAT I S WASTED I F EACH OF THOSE OARSMEN, OR ANY OF
THOSE OARSMEN, I S OUT OF SYNC OR NOT PULLI NG TOGETHER.
THE I NSTANT CASE REPRESENTS AN I NTERGOVERNMENTAL
DI SPUTE OVER THE AGE OLD PROBLEM OF HOWTO FUND SI GNI FI CANT
I NFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTI ON PROJ ECTS. I N THI S CASE THE
PROJ ECTS TRANSCEND THE TYPI CAL LOCAL STRUCTURE, TO I NCLUDE
REGI ONAL TRANSPORTATI ON. THE CREATI ON OF THE TUMF PROGRAM
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
REPRESENTS A REGI ONAL STRATEGY TO FI NANCE AND CONSTRUCT
REGI ONAL ARTERI AL HI GHWAYS AND ROADWAYS I N A COGENT,
SYSTEMATI C, AND HOPEFULLY ECONOMI C FASHI ON.
THE FACT THAT THE COUNTY OF RI VERSI DE, AND EVERY
LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTI TY I N WESTERN RI VERSI DE COUNTY, OR
WESTERN REGI ON OF RI VERSI DE COUNTY, EVENTUALLY J OI NED I N
THI S ENDEAVOR, REPRESENTS NOT ONLY THE I MPORTANCE OF THI S
TRANSPORTATI ON I NFRASTRUCTURE, BUT ALSO THE VI ABI LI TY OF
THE ENTERPRI SE. LI KE ROWI NG, THE ONE CAVEAT I S, AND WAS,
THAT ALL OF THE MEMBERS OF THE TUMF PROGRAM NEED TO PULL
TOGETHER.
AS DEMONSTRATED BY EXHI BI TS 1003 AND 1004, THE
CI TY OF BEAUMONT ADOPTED THE TUMF MODEL ORDI NANCE. I TS
LEGI SLATI VE BODY, THE CI TY COUNCI L, THEREBY PROVI DI NG CLEAR
POLI CY DI RECTI ON, REQUI RED THAT THE CI TY COMPLY WI TH THE
REQUI SI TES OF THE TUMF PROGRAM.
THE PROBLEM APPEARS TO BE THE I NCONSI STENCY, OR
THE APPARENT I NCOMPATI BI LI TY, OF THE C. F. D. CREATED BY THE
CI TY I N 1993 TO BUI LD I NFRASTRUCTURE WI THI N THE CI TY
LI MI TS, I NCLUDI NG TRANSPORTATI ON I NFRASTRUCTURE. AFTER THE
PASSAGE BY THE BEAUMONT CI TY COUNCI L OF THE ORI GI NAL TUMF
ORDI NANCE I N 2003, CI TY STAFF, FROM THE CI TY MANAGER ON
DOWN, ADOPTED A POSI TI ON THAT THE CI TY' S TUMF OBLI GATI ONS
WERE SATI SFI ED BY THE CI TY TRANSPORTATI ON PROJ ECTS, LARGELY
FUNDED AND CONSTRUCTED THROUGH C. F. D. 93- 1.
THEI R ARGUMENT, SI MPLY STATED, I S THAT ANY WORK
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
DONE ON A CI TY ROADWAY I DENTI FI ED BY THE TUMF NEXUS STUDY,
AS I NCLUDED WI THI N THE TUMF NETWORK, WAS A QUALI FI ED TUMF
PROJ ECT, FOR WHI CH THE CI TY SHOULD BE CREDI TED AS HAVI NG
CONSTRUCTED AS I TS OWN, OR AS PART OF I TS TUMF OBLI GATI ON.
THE COURT I S SATI SFI ED AND FI NDS THAT THE
POSI TI ON OF CI TY STAFF WAS MOTI VATED BY CERTAI N COMMI TMENTS
TO BEAUMONT AREA DEVELOPERS, AS WELL AS AN I MPERATI VE TO
HELP FUEL FURTHER AND GREATER DEVELOPMENT WI THI N BEAUMONT
CI TY LI MI TS. SI MPLE ECONOMI CS EXPLAI N WHY CI TY STAFF WOULD
TAKE SUCH A POSI TI ON.
UNDER THE C. F. D. , THE CI TY I SSUED BONDS THAT PAI D
FOR THE TRANSPORTATI ON PROJ ECTS. THE BONDS WERE SECURED BY
LI ENS ON THE I NDI VI DUAL PARCELS WI THI N THE CI TY' S LI MI TS.
THE BONDS, PAI D BY A SUPPLEMENTAL - - OR A SUPPLEMENTAL BI LL
ADDED TO THE ANNUAL PROPERTY TAX LEVY. NO UP FRONT MONEY
WAS REQUI RED TO BE PAI D BY ANY DEVELOPER WHO OPTED FOR THI S
FORM OF FI NANCI NG.
THE DEVELOPERS THEREBY HAD NO CARRYI NG CHARGES
FOR THE COST OF BORROWED MONEY TO PAY UP FRONT FOR
CONSTRUCTI ON OF THESE TRANSPORTATI ON PROJ ECTS. MOREOVER,
THE COSTS ARE EFFECTI VELY HI DDEN FROM THE PROPERTY BUYERS,
WHO DO NOT SEE PRI CE I NCREASES TO COVER DEVELOPER
OUT- OF- POCKET DEVELOPMENT COSTS. I NSTEAD, THE BUYER PAYS
FOR THE PROJ ECT I NCREMENTALLY OVER THE LI FE OF THE BOND
THROUGH THOSE TAX ASSESSMENTS OR ADDI TI ONS TO THE TAX
BI LLS.
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONTRARI WI SE, TUMF REQUI RES UP- FRONT PAYMENTS OUT
OF POCKET FROM DEVELOPERS. OF COURSE, I T I S EXPECTED THAT
THESE COSTS WI LL BE RECOUPED BY AN I NCREASE I N SALES PRI CE
OF THE PROPERTI ES THAT ARE CONTAI NED WI THI N THE DEVELOPER' S
PROJ ECT. THI S SOMETI MES RESULTS I N A RI SK OR GAMBLE THAT
CERTAI N DEVELOPERS ARE UNWI LLI NG TO ASSUME.
THE NET EFFECT OF THI S DI CHOTOMY I S, FOLLOWI NG
THE BEAUMONT PREFERENCE, TO GI VE BEAUMONT THE EDGE I N
ATTRACTI NG DEVELOPERS AND GREATER DEVELOPMENT AS AGAI NST
ALL OTHER WESTERN RI VERSI DE J URI SDI CTI ONS THAT I MPOSE THE
MANDATED TUMF FEE UP FRONT.
SMALL WONDER THEN THAT THE BEAUMONT I MPERATI VE
WAS ALSO TO KEEP ALL MONEY COLLECTED VI A C. F. D. 93- 1 I N
TOWN AND SPENT ONLY ON LOCAL I MPROVEMENTS AND FACI LI TI ES.
ALL OF THI S LEADS I NESCAPABLY TO THE COURT' S FI NDI NG THAT
CI TY MANAGEMENT AND STAFF CONTRACTORS VI OLATED THE
DI RECTI VES OF THE CI TY' S TUMF ORDI NANCES TO SATI SFY THI S
I MPERATI VE.
I N THE END, I T APPEARS THAT THE CI TY EXPECTED TO
BE TREATED DI FFERENTLY I N THE TUMF PROGRAM THAN ALL OTHER
MEMBERS OF THAT PROGRAM.
MOREOVER, I T I S CLEAR THAT CI TY STAFF CHOSE TO
OVERLOOK THE CLEAR MANDATE OF THE CI TY COUNCI L REVEALED BY
I TS ADOPTED TUMF ORDI NANCES, I NCLUDI NG THE DI RECTI ON TO
COMPLY WI TH THE TUMF PLAN. OF PARTI CULAR NOTE I S THE TUMF
REQUI REMENT THAT POST- 2003 FI NANCI NG MECHANI SMS, SUCH AS
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
C. F. D. 93- 1, BE MADE TO CONFORM TO THE TUMF PROGRAM, AND
THE REQUI REMENT THAT NEWFI NANCI NG PLANS OR BOND I SSUES FOR
TRANSPORTATI ON, OR FOR THAT MATTER, CREDI T OR DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENTS, HAVE PRE- APPROVAL FROM W. R. COG.
A WORD ABOUT CONFORMANCE OF C. F. D. 93- 1 WI TH TUMF
I S APPROPRI ATE. THE COURT' S QUESTI ONS OF MR. MC NEI LL
ABOUT C. F. D. 93- 1 AND LI MI TI NG I TS COVERAGE TO EXCLUDE
REGI ONAL TRANSPORTATI ON, THOSE QUESTI ONS, THAT I S, WERE NOT
SI MPLY I DLE THOUGHTS. I N THE COURT' S ESTI MATI ON, C. F. D.
93- 1 COULD HAVE BEEN, AND, I NDEED, SHOULD HAVE BEEN,
MODI FI ED TO EXCLUDE REGI ONAL TRANSPORTATI ON PROJ ECTS, WHI LE
CONTI NUI NG TO COVER OTHER LOCAL PROJ ECTS, I NCLUDI NG WATER,
SEWAGE, AND LOCAL TRANSPORTATI ON.
THE CI TY COULD HAVE REDUCED THE LI MI T OF BONDED
I NDEBTEDNESS AUTHORI ZED FROM THE 655- MI LLI ON- DOLLAR AMOUNT
I NDI CATED BY MR. MC NEI LL, TO, FOR I NSTANCE, 600 MI LLI ON,
OR FOR THAT MATTER, 550 MI LLI ON, I F SO NECESSARY, TO
REFLECT WHAT I WOULD CALL A TUMF I NCREMENT, AND THEN
COMPLI ED WI TH THE TUMF PROGRAM REQUI REMENTS TO I MPOSE A
TUMF FEE UPON NEWDEVELOPMENT.
I NSTEAD, THE CI TY OPTED FOR WHAT ONE COULD CALL
THE, QUOTE, WI LLFUL CHI LD, END QUOTE, SYNDROME. I NDEED,
THE EVI DENCE REFLECTS THAT CONTRARY TO TUMF ORDI NANCES,
CI TY STAFF TRI ED REPEATEDLY TO MAKE THE TUMF PROGRAM
CONFORM TO THE C. F. D. 93- 1 PROGRAM, RATHER THAN CONFORM THE
C. F. D. 93- 1 TO TUMF.
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
I N MAKI NG I TS FI NDI NGS, THE COURT I S CONSTRAI NED
TO COMMENT I N SOME SMALL FASHI ON ON THE CREDI BI LI TY OF THE
WI TNESSES. HERE, THE COURT NOTES THAT I T WAS EXTREMELY
I MPRESSED WI TH THE CHARACTER, QUALI TY, AND CREDI BI LI TY OF
PETI TI ONER' S EXPERTS, MESSRS. CHYLI NSKI AND ZI MMERMAN.
MR. ZI MMERMAN' S ANALYSI S OF THE CI TY' S ROAD PROJ ECTS
ALLEGEDLY ON THE TUMF NETWORK, PROVI DED AN ENCYCLOPEDI C
VI EWOF THE DEFI CI ENCI ES I N THE CI TY' S CLAI MS TO HAVE
MEANI NGFULLY PARTI CI PATED I N AND CONTRI BUTED TO THE TUMF
PROGRAM.
SI MI LARLY, MR. CHYLI NSKI ' S REVI EWAND ANALYSI S OF
THE FI NANCI AL AND COMPLI ANCE I SSUES OF THE CI TY' S CLAI MED
COMPLI ANCE WI TH TUMF WERE REVEALI NG; I NDEED, THEY WERE
STARTLI NG. RESPONDENT' S WI TNESSES, PARTI CULARLY,
MESSRS. DI LLON, HUGHES, AND MOORJ ANI EI THER LACKED SPECI FI C
KNOWLEDGE OR WERE NOT CREDI BLE I N THEI R TESTI MONY REGARDI NG
COMPLI ANCE WI TH THE TUMF CONTRI BUTI ON REQUI REMENTS.
AT BOTTOM, THE COURT FI NDS THAT I N NO I NSTANCE
DI D THE CI TY' S CLAI MED CONSTRUCTI ON OF TRANSPORTATI ON
I MPROVEMENTS SATI SFY THE TUMF REQUI REMENTS TO ADD TRUE
ROADWAY CAPACI TY. I F ANYTHI NG, THE EVI DENCE SHOWS POOR
LOCAL TRANSPORTATI ON PLANNI NG AND EXECUTI ON, RESULTI NG I N
BOTTLENECKS AND DELAYS THAT I MPAI R THE NECESSARY ADDED
CAPACI TY.
MOREOVER, THE COURT FI NDS THAT THE CI TY FAI LED TO
COMPLY WI TH THE TUMF PLAN, REQUI RI NG PRE- APPROVAL FOR
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
POST- 2003 FI NANCI NG OR DEVELOPER AGREEMENTS OR DEVELOPER
CREDI TS, AND GENERALLY FAI LED AT EVERY TURN TO COMPLY WI TH
VI RTUALLY ANY OTHER TUMF PLAN REQUI REMENT.
THE EVI DENCE SADLY REVEALED SOMETHI NG MORE THAT
THE COURT FEELS OBLI GED TO SPEAK TO. THE EVI DENCE AND
TESTI MONY REVEALS THAT CI TY MANAGEMENT AND STAFF ENGAGED I N
A PATTERN AND PRACTI CE OF DECEPTI ON THAT TRANSCENDS THE
TYPI CAL GI VE AND TAKE OF DI SPUTE NEGOTI ATI ON. HAD THI S
BEEN A TYPI CAL CI VI L TRI AL CONTAI NI NG ALLEGATI ONS OF FRAUD,
I WOULD HAVE FOUND FRAUD BY CLEAR AND CONVI NCI NG EVI DENCE
AS AGAI NST THE CI TY.
TO BE CLEAR, HOWEVER, AND I WANT TO MAKE THI S
VERY CLEAR, THI S I S NOT SOMETHI NG TO EVER BE ASCRI BED TO
THE CI TY' S CURRENT COUNSEL, MR. MC NEI LL OR MS. MC VEAN.
YOU' RE LAWYERS, NOT PARTI CI PANTS.
FI NALLY, MR. MC NEI LL URGES THAT THE COURT I S
PROSCRI BED BY LAWFROM I MPOSI NG A REMEDY REGARDI NG OR
REQUI RI NG THE CI TY TO COLLECT A TUMF FEE RETROACTI VELY, I F
YOU WI LL, FROM THE DEVELOPERS I N THE CI TY FOR THE
APPLI CABLE DEVELOPMENT TI ME PERI OD OF 2005 TO 2009.
HOWEVER, THAT I S NOT THE REMEDY SOUGHT BY PETI TI ONER.
HERE PETI TI ONER SEEKS, AND THE COURT GRANTS, A
WRI T OF MANDATE, COMPELLI NG RESPONDENT CI TY TO REMI T SUMS
COMMENSURATE WI TH THE TUMF FEES I T HAD COMMI TTED TO REMI T
DURI NG THE RELEVANT TI ME PERI OD OF 2005 THROUGH 2009. AND
I DO NOT SPECI FY THE EXACT DATES. THE RECORD I S CLEAR AS
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
TO THE START DATE AND THE ENDI NG DATE WHEN THE CI TY WAS
REMOVED FROM THE TUMF PROGRAM.
HERE, THE COURT FI NDS THAT THE AMOUNT REQUI RED TO
BE REMI TTED I S TO BE THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF 42, 994, 879, PLUS
I NTEREST, TO BE CALCULATED AT THE LEGAL RATE BEGI NNI NG
OCTOBER 2009 AND TO THE PRESENT. AND PETI TI ONER WI LL DO
THAT CALCULATI ON, SUBMI T A DECLARATI ON ACCOMPANYI NG A
PROPOSED J UDGMENT THAT OUTLI NES HOWTHE CALCULATI ON WAS
MADE, AND HOWTHE SUM - - WHAT THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THAT SUM
I S TO BE ADDED TO THE AMOUNT OF THE J UDGMENT.
I ' M DI RECTI NG MR. DUNN/ MR. EASTMOND TO PREPARE
THE J UDGMENT AND TO CI RCULATE, OF COURSE, TO MR. MC NEI LL,
AND ALSO OF COURSE TO THE COURT. WE CONCLUDE. ANY
QUESTI ONS?
MR. MC NEI LL: FOR THE RECORD, RESPONDENTS REQUEST A
STATEMENT OF DECI SI ON.
THE COURT: YOU HAVE TO FOLLOWTHE CODE OF CI VI L
PROCEDURE. SO YOUR ORAL REQUEST I S NOT SUFFI CI ENT. YOU
NEED TO MAKE I T I N WRI TI NG WI THI N THE TI ME FRAME PRESCRI BED
BY THE CODE, BUT I ' M NOT SURPRI SED.
MR. MC NEI LL: WELL - -
THE COURT: ALL RI GHT. TO EACH OF YOU, I THANK YOU
FOR YOUR PARTI CI PATI ON HERE AND YOUR EXCELLENT
PRESENTATI ONS. I WI SH YOU ALL WELL. AND GO ARMY, BEAT
NAVY. THAT' S MORE FOR MS. TAYLER BERGER.
( DI SCUSSI ON OFF THE RECORD. )
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
THE COURT: I T' S BEEN A LONG FOUR WEEKS. EVERYBODY GO
HOME AND GET RESTED UP FOR THE NEXT ROUND.
MR. DUNN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
( END OF PROCEEDI NGS. )
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26