Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM-75-0129The Honorable Members of The City Coem.i.ss ion John S . Lloyd City Attorney 1 ... ... jV is February 12, 1975 -pe Pursuant to instructions, Mr. AncUews and myself met with Guy Bailey, Esquire, of the lava firm of Pettigrew & Bailey relative to a proposal that the firm of Pettigre., & Bailey be retained as special counsel for the City of Miami to make a study for the purpose of making a recommendation to the City as to the feasibility of a quiet title suit with respect to the property known as Ball Point. A letter frc;n Mr. Bailey to Mr. Andreas which is attached explains the proposal submitted to Mr. Andrews and myself by Mr. Bailey. Numerous documents and other research materials gathered by the Law Department in its previous research involving this subject matter have recently been made available to lIr. Bailey. This includes documents and materials gathered and prepared by the Department of Public Works and by a member of the Real Property Tax Division of Dade County. If engaged as special counsel, Mr. Bailey and nis associates will use the information supplied by the Law Department as well as, presumaoly, the results of their own investigation and research in order to arrive at an opinion. The purpose of the employment of the firm of Pettigrew & Bailey would be to get another opinion besides the opinion of the City. Attorney concerning the title to the Ball Point erenerty. The employment of the law firm of Pettigrew & Dailey as special counsel for the aforesaid purpose is a matter tor the discretion of the City Commission. JSL/rr Enclosure u � /1' 04/ i'E i 'r1c:r4 VI Y1 AP4D E3A 1 LEY! !Y ' :'1 - . Honorable Paul Andrews, City Manager, City oE Miami, City Hall, Dinner Rey, Miami, Florida. Dear Mr. Andrews: r- y This will confirm our discussions of January 29, 1975, in which we indicated to you that this firm has expended approximately 100 hours as of that date in preliminary investigation of the title to the land kno;•;n as Ball Point. it is our estimate and hope that an additional 150 hours will he sufficient for us to reach a point of giving the City a specific recommendation whether to corarn. nce a lawsuit to quiet title or to cease further inquiry. Our normal hourly rates are $75 an hour, except for Dick Pettigrew and me (each of us normally charges $100 per hour) . This, of course, is the rate for ongoing and regular clients of the fir, and makes no mention of additional contingent fees which we quite frequently receive from clients on isolated matters. Because of the nature of the undertaking, however, we are willing to accept a flat $1.1,250 fee in the hope that we can complete our opinion in 150 hours of additional study and investigation- If additional hours are necessary Lo give CiLy a recommendation as aforesaid, the expense of th:?se hours will be borne by this firm. Assuming that we make a recommendation to proceed with litigation and assuming that the City accepts such a recom- mendation, we would be willing to proceed with such litigation ern _ '• yA jibelR'sR✓''A„e�-c!'•'�.wf•.'a"�..'r`'ys'•!trig;kih� re�C!3tJ�<'t`s�»tiyi- • :-..... 00.V-P 'J!" ',.r,i�•.d - 114a. '� U ..#-•; • f :aiPlyr' w' Mrme•ns. ''�,. ►� yr` C� � ,w�. ir+ ... . . .. • . .'.. i+ • ... •�r ..•..� . �.. ._•`''*---- •... .r3.w'A .ad ram,. =.,,;rwSw'+'.J+;s':�: :.:J• aaw.ri...s �:1:.. •r.. Honorable Paui. An'arc ---1, February 10, 1975 Page '.L ,•re. .it the rata of $100 an hour for court Lime and $ 5 an hour tor all other time expanded on the Matter. We would propose to ?:ice:`.• such bi1:i iTtc;:3 on a monthly basis, This arrangement would b necessarily open-ended (assuming we perform to the City';s satisfaction) for the value of the land in guestion is ;o immense and the resources of our proposed adversary so vast that there is absolutely no way to estimate the number of hours Which might actually ba expended in suit. It goes without saying that, after litigation is commenced, the City has the ongoing protection of the rule that any client may discharge any lawyer at any time. Both our proposal as to completion of the investigation preliminary to suit and the handling of the suit itself are based upon two additional understandings. First and most important, we would hope to continue to receive the excellent assistance we have already had from city departments (foremost among which has been the City Attorney's office) in obtaining documents, surveys, land records and the like, as well as any purely legal assistance the City Attorney's office may from time to time be able to give us. This would save attorney timo (and therefore City fees) and would give us information probably unavcail,:ble elsewhere. Second, we. would, of course, expect to be reimbursed for all costs reasonably expended in the furtherance of both investigation and of trial. I believe that this sets down accurately our conversations. If it does not, please let me know promptly so that we may clarify any point which mav be in doubt. We look fort•.ard to the opportunity both to work with you and Loy- you in this matter of such great potential importance to th:: City. GBE3 j/rnc 1fAND ULLIVERY Very truly yours, Guy B. ailey, Jr. Pr:_TT1 C F-21.IN Arlo BA1 L1c.:Y Jet Y,:G `T•T Nl S+AKiNi�.��.�'�{��Y,+?NY}WM3=.'YM�A�7FR1+.1'�tA'A!�MWI+•SAY/�w WIMMwaM•��a1.YM.w.