K&S will remain on schools case: More on the story

Reprinted with permission from Daily Report online

Civil case over DeKalb construction contracts will go to trial after criminal matters have been tried
By Kathleen Baydala Joyner, Staff Reporter

A DeKalb County Judge ruled Wednesday that King & Spalding can remain the counsel for the county school system in a multimillion-dollar case, despite his view that the firm's lawyers negotiated an unfair fee agreement, stonewalled discovery and potentially witnessed discussion of criminal activity.

Judge Clarence Seeliger:
The case "has probably infuriated
me more than any other."

Superior Court Judge Clarence F. Seeliger said the fee agreement was an issue between the school board and the firm—and the school board and the voters. The discovery battles have been resolved, he added, and allegations that K&S lawyers witnessed discussion of criminal activity could be verified by non-attorneys who may have seen the same events.

Seeliger said he thought of ordering mediation for the school system and the construction companies with whom it has been locked in litigation for four years. But he decided there is no way the two sides can resolve the case without a trial, which will take place after the criminal matters have been tried.

"I've had lots of cases, but this has probably infuriated me more than any other," said Seeliger.

His decision came after several hours of heated arguments between King & Spalding lawyers and lawyers from DLA Piper, representing the construction management companies whose firing by the school district in 2006 prompted the litigation.

The hearing was the latest chapter in a saga involving DeKalb's former school district superintendent and chief operating officer, who are facing criminal indictments for corruption; three major construction management companies accused of civil racketeering; and big-name Atlanta attorneys.

DLA Piper is representing Heery International Inc., E.R. Mitchell & Co. and Heery/Mitchell Joint Venture, which did construction work for the school district. They wanted Seeliger to kick K&S off the case because, they claimed, K&S essentially controls the litigation—possibly against the best interests of the school district—due to its contingency fee agreement with the DeKalb schools.

DLA Piper also asserted that K&S concealed or blocked evidence, including the suspect status of a top-ranking school district official who oversaw construction projects, and that K&S attorneys may be called as material witnesses in the civil trial and a separate criminal case.

DLA Piper's lead attorneys are Atlanta managing partner Mark E. Grantham and Paul N. Monnin. K&S's lead attorneys are partners W. Ray Persons and Robert C. Khayat Jr., but K&S partner L. Joseph Loveland Jr. represented his colleagues during the hearing.

Heery/Mitchell and the other companies filed suit against the school district in 2007 for breach of contract, seeking roughly $1.5 million. The district filed a countersuit seeking $100 million, charging the companies with racketeering. In May 2010, former school district superintendent Crawford Lewis and chief operating officer Pat Reid (she then went by Pat Pope) were indicted on corruption charges.

DLA Piper claimed that as early as November 2008, Lewis notified K&S about a criminal investigation into the chief operating officer, a matter K&S concealed or misrepresented to the court and DLA Piper.

"Roughly three years ago [when the DeKalb County District Attorney began its criminal investigation], the school district trial counsel was confronted by a fork in the road and they shifted from merely acting as advocates for their client to key participants," Grantham said during his opening statement.

Grantham said K&S wanted the civil case to go to trial without evidence of criminal conduct by school district officials being revealed.

"It seems there is a question of fraud on this court by refusing to disclose to the court or us that a criminal investigation was under way and may have a serious impact on the civil litigation."

Grantham said K&S has unfairly painted his firm's discovery and deposition attempts as harassment, mischaracterized whether K&S's star witness Reid was a suspect in a criminal investigation and advised Lewis to try to convince the DeKalb DA to delay his investigation until after the civil trial to preserve K&S's case against Heery/Mitchell.

Grantham added that K&S's financial stake in the form of a contingency agreement forged in 2008 means the firm may veto attempts by the school district to settle the matter at a lesser amount than the firm's break-even sum of about $35 million, which is calculated as the firm's post-June 2008 fees and payments for expert witnesses.

Grantham posed a scenario to the court that if the school district were to win its case and receive an award of $35 million, it would not actually net any money because all of it would go to either reimburse the district for costs already incurred or to finish paying K&S.

"Disqualification would remove the proverbial Sword of Damocles hanging over their heads in the form of their unconscionable fee agreement, where counsel's financial interest is paramount," Grantham said.

Loveland, speaking for K&S, told Seeliger, "These unproven attacks are simply legion, and no evidence supports any of them."

Loveland accused DLA Piper of kicking up dust to conceal its clients' deceit of the school district and county taxpayers through its mishandling of $500 million in school construction projects.

"This case has been pending for four years. There have been three separate motions to disqualify [K&S]," Loveland said. "There is no claim here that King & Spalding has a conflict of interest with Heery/Mitchell. Instead, as Mr. Grantham says, Heery/Mitchell takes the remarkable position that it, not the school board or the school board's independent counsel, should stand as the guardian for the school board's interest. That is simply not the law in Georgia or anywhere."

Loveland accused DLA Piper of filing its latest motion to disqualify to pressure the district to drop its suit or at the very least further delay a trial to cause the district to rack up more expenses.

"This is a phenomenal motion to bring to this court with no affidavit or any legal experts on ethics with any facts that [King & Spalding's] contract constitutes any violation of ethical rule[s]," Loveland said.

Loveland then argued that ousting K&S would prevent the school district from having its day in court because no other firm could pick up where it left off and successfully litigate the complicated case.

"Our firm has spent hundreds of hours going through documents because the fraud [by Heery/Mitchell] is in the documents," he said. "The conflict would be if our firm did not put time and energy in the case to zealously represent our client."

Monnin said one reason that DLA Piper did not move the judge for disqualification of opposing counsel sooner is because K&S dragged its feet on handing over evidence during discovery.

DLA Piper served discovery in March 2009 but didn't receive some evidence until two years later, including calendars and notes that showed meetings between school district officials, internal affairs investigators and attorneys for K&S and other outside counsel, he told the judge. That evidence further shows that K&S had knowledge of a criminal investigation but did not disclose it to the court or DLA Piper, he said.

After the ruling, Tom Bowen, chairman of the DeKalb County Board of Education, said he was relieved.

"Had the judge gone the other way, there would have been pretty serious hardships for the district because the case is so complex to start with it would have cost millions just for a new firm to get up to speed," he said.

Bowen acknowledged that the district's fee contract with K&S would obviously be part of any settlement discussion, but he defended the agreement by saying paying the firm on a contingency basis avoided up-front costs from the schools' already-strained operating budgets.

More money down the rabbit hole

Read this article at the AJC:
Construction firm to ask judge to remove DeKalb schools' lawyers in $100 million suit

This article tells us that not only have we been in a lawsuit with Heery-Mitchell for over five years now over SPLOST II projects, we have spent a reported $17 million from our general operating fund (you know, the one that is supposed to run the schools) on attorneys. Not all that long ago, the board made a deal with King & Spalding (our $17 million law firm in this case) to continue the suit on a contingency basis, meaning that if they win, they get a portion of the reward on top of what they've already been paid.

If DeKalb loses the case, King & Spalding gets nothing. If DeKalb wins, the firm would get a percentage of the earnings, based on accrued work. Right now, that figure stands at $19 million.

In Heery’s motion, the contingency fees give King & Spalding a financial stake in the case, and should disqualify the firm.

Heery-Mitchell's attorneys are claiming that King & Spalding had prior knowledge of the criminal activities of former superintendent, Crawford Lewis and his construction manager, Patricia (Pope) Reid and have a financial stake in the outcome of the civil trial with Heery and should therefore be removed as counsel. I infer from this that the underlying assumption is that the criminal trials could have a serious negative effect on the school system's civil case, as Pope and Lewis are their star witnesses against Heery. It seems we're in a game of cat and mouse. The criminal trial is the linchpin. If it happens before the civil trial, it could be devastating to the school system's case. If the civil trial happens first, the school system will have a better chance, due to the fact that their key witnesses have not yet been convicted of anything. (BTW, the criminal trial is also costing us millions in legal fees both for school system and the county DA. Taxpayers are essentially paying for both the prosecution and the defense in this case.)

“The loss of King & Spalding, five years into the case, would be financially devastating to the district,” Bowen said. “The cost to bring another law firm up to speed would be staggering."

(Just curious Tom, do you not think the costs to date are already staggering?)

How much farther down this rabbit trail do we plan to hop? Are we really sure we want to hand this group hundreds of millions more in construction money? I think we may want to stop, assess the past, clean up the mess and then perhaps turn our attention to devising a new plan – a plan that has an educationally-driven vision.

Why is Tom Bowen Supporting the Criminally-Indicted Superintendent?

The following has been reported to us by one of our blog supporters - many thanks.

On Wednesday, April 27, 2011 the Court of Appeals heard oral arguments related to the DCSS Construction Corruption case (on appeal from DeKalb Superior Court, case number IOCR2861). Specifically, Crawford Lewis' attorneys argued that DeKalb County Superior Court Judge CJ Becker had abused her discretion in ruling that Alston & Bird, the firm representing Lewis in the criminal matter, was disqualified due to a conflict of interest. Parsons Technology Group is the program management company that took over the running of the DCSS construction department after P. Pope was reassigned after the 10/2009 search warrants. An employee of Parsons is now the interim CIT Officer and is essentially the new Pat Pope. This employee, according to the prosecutor's argument at the Court of Appeals, will be a major State's witness against P. Pope and C. Lewis at the criminal trial. The conflict stems from the fact that Parsons Technology Group is a longtime, multi-million dollar client of Alston & Bird. In more specific terms, Lewis' attorneys will inevitably be in a position to cross-examine a high-ranking employee of very large client. This is a built-in basis for an eventual "ineffective assistance of counsel" claim by Lewis once convicted. Such a conflict may be waivable in a civil matter, but not in a criminal matter.

The Court of Appeals hearing was set to start at 10:00. It did not get underway until about 10:40. Tom Bowen, current DCSS Board Of Education Chairman, showed up to the proceeding prior to its start. He made his way to Crawford Lewis and his family. He hugged Lewis and members of Lewis' family. After exchanging hugs and pleasantries, Chairman Bowen then sat behind the Lewis family (on the Appellant/Lewis side of the courtroom) in a blatant show of support for the indicted former superintendent who was fired nearly a year ago.

Why in the WORLD would Tom Bowen show up to this proceeding? And in support of Crawford Lewis? Why isn't he supporting the District Attorney's Office that did the difficult and right thing and pursued the criminal charges against Lewis? Could it be due to the need to protect the outcome of the school system's $100 million lawsuit against Heery/Mitchell Construction? A conviction on the indictments of Lewis and Pat Pope would certainly harm the school system's civil case – a case that they have already spent over $15 million on King & Spalding and other legal entities.  

Tom, are you with DCSS OR are you with the former superintendent who was indicted for running a criminal enterprise? Do you support DCSS OR do you support indicted Lewis? You can't have it both ways.

Were you there on your own ...OR on behalf the entire Board?

Either way – it was irresponsible of you and certainly sends a disappointing message to DeKalb County residents about you, the board you represent and your intentions.

DA: 'Bad faith' in schools case

Battle brews over schools' desire to vet requests seeking school system documents from DA's office
By Janet L. Conley, Associate Editor, 'Daily Report'

The DeKalb County district attorney and King & Spalding are clashing bitterly as multimillion-dollar civil litigation over the DeKalb County School District, the firm's client, becomes enmeshed with the DA's prosecution of former school officials.

In a scathing brief filed on Friday and replete with phrases that have been italicized, bolded or both, DeKalb DA Robert D. James Jr. wrote that King & Spalding and its client showed "bad faith and collusion" and claimed attorney-client privilege "where it does not exist" in discovery-related matters.

The DA's office stopped just short of accusing the firm of making a frivolous bid to halt discovery, implying via carefully placed quotation marks that King & Spalding and the school district engaged in disingenuous legal reasoning: "As with the 'confusion' over adequate remedies at law … it would seem that this Court continues to experience delays due to such 'legal missteps.'"

The legal issue underlying this war of words is whether King & Spalding and its client should be able to vet a third-party discovery request seeking school system documents not from the school system itself, but from the DA's office. Prosecutors had obtained the papers from the school system via voluntary document production, subpoena and seizure following a search warrant.

A key player in this drama is the school system's adversary in the civil case, Heery International Inc., which contends the school system in bad faith terminated its contract to manage school construction projects.

Heery has, in the context of its civil litigation, asked the DA's office to produce documents the DA obtained from the school system in preparation for a criminal corruption case alleging school officials including former Superintendent Crawford Lewis jettisoned Heery and its joint venture partner, E.R. Mitchell & Co., so they could illegally steer contracts to friends. That request came on the heels of Heery's so-far unsuccessful bid to get those same documents via an Open Records Act request.

"This Court should prohibit Heery from obtaining through the back door what it cannot [get] through the front door," wrote King & Spalding partner Robert C. Khayat Jr. That plea came in a motion to prevent the DA from producing the documents until the school district's counsel can review them for attorney-client privilege or work product issues.

But the DA's office responded that the school district has stonewalled discovery all along: "The paucity of documents produced and the improper redacting of documents that were provided forced the District Attorney to obtain search warrants in order to properly investigate its case."

Khayat, in an interview, said his firm was not involved in the production of those documents and always has encouraged the school district to "cooperate as much as possible."

The school district first attempted to protect the documents with a motion for a protective order to the judge in the civil matter, DeKalb Superior Court Judge Clarence F. Seeliger. He heard arguments on the issue in March and, at a suggestion from the DA's office—which Deputy Chief Assistant DA John S. Melvin later retracted—told the schools' counsel he thought they needed to petition for mandamus.

On April 1, the school district filed a petition for mandamus, only to be met by the DA's vehement motion to dismiss. The mandamus, the DA argued, seeks "what is tantamount to preemptive injunctive relief" and is legally insupportable to a degree that the school system must have known.

Khayat responded: "The relief that we're seeking is not in any way frivolous. We're seeking the protection of the attorney-client privilege, which is one of the most sacrosanct privileges in law."
James, did not return a call for comment.

David Rubinger, a spokesman for DLA Piper, the law firm for Heery International, declined to comment because the matter is pending, saying that the DA's filings speak for themselves.

One of those filings, a brief in support of the motion to dismiss the mandamus petition, calls the nature of the petition "haphazard and ill-advised." It links the school district's pushback on discovery requests to "a belief that at least some [school district] officials and employees who are being prosecuted in the Criminal Case cannot be called as witnesses in the Civil Case due to the potential that they may raise their Fifth Amendment privilege."

But the Fifth Amendment doesn't present an absolute bar to calling criminal defendants in civil cases, the DA's office argued. It added in a footnote that the Fifth Amendment shields against compelled self-incrimination, not legitimate inquiry, which means it is the trial court's responsibility "to determine whether the refusal to respond to discovery is within the privilege claimed."
The motion to dismiss then lists at least 25 grounds for dismissal.

Included are suggestions about appropriate means by which King & Spalding could have sought to protect the documents—such as excluding such evidence at the civil trial. The DA also alleged that the school district waived any privilege it had when its counsel contacted lawyers for a defendant in the criminal case.

The DA charged that the petitioned relief—an order "essentially directing the District Attorney to 'pre-clear' responsive documents through counsel" for the school district—can't prevent their public use because they are subject to being filed as discovery. The documents can also be introduced as evidence in the criminal case to which the school district is not a party and has no standing, the DA said.

Also, the DA said, to support a petition for mandamus, the school district must show it would suffer harm, and it hasn't done so.

Instead, the school district "merely incants 'privilege,' failing to identify any particulars," the DA's office argued.

The DA added that King & Spalding took one "desultory swipe" at privilege when it alleged that the DA's office was cooperating with Heery, as the DA produced some of the allegedly privileged documents after the school district filed its motion for a protective order but 24 days before a response was due.

Those affidavits were from Cynthia L. Hill, a lawyer working as a compliance officer with the school district who became a whistleblower and whose affidavits apparently address whether Heery was wrongfully terminated.

The DA's office said the school district's claim of privilege in that affidavit, because it involves "one lawyer speaking to another lawyer," is a "mischaracterization" because Hill "was not seeking or giving legal advice."

The DA analogized that claim to "the same sort of frivolous claims of 'potential privilege' condemned by [the] Federal District Court for the Northern District of Georgia in CBT Flint Partners LLC v. Return Path, Inc. … [where] Judge Thomas Thrash awarded attorney's fees after King & Spalding … made discovery claims that were determined to be, among other things, 'just not true.'"

That case, said Khayat, is irrelevant in the present action. "I think this should be decided on the facts and circumstances here," he said.

The DA's office also alleged that King & Spalding and its client mischaracterized their release of the Hill affidavits as "evidence of some sort of preposterous conspiracy between Heery … and District Attorney James. This tapestry of vitriol is unsupported by anything other than fear and suspicion and is patently false."

In a footnote, the DA's office continued, "Such acrimony is indicative of counsel who not only files suit without legal justification, but who has also lost objectivity."

Khayat denied that his firm acted without legal justification. "The relief that we're seeking is not extraordinary. It's just an opportunity to make any appropriate privilege reviews," he said. "It's standard to review your own documents prior to production, and often in the context of two parties, who for example have contracted together and done so on a confidential basis, it would be ordinary for one to offer the other to review documents prior to a response to a subpoena. Here, it's a little bit different because the district attorney's office seized … some documents, and others were given voluntarily."

Khayat said some of the documents likely are privileged because they reflect the content of meetings between the district and its lawyers. He stressed that his client was not looking for a blanket protective order, only for an opportunity to raise any privilege issues before the judge.

But the DA's office, in its motion to dismiss, pointed to a darker notion, alleging that rather than attempting to satisfy the "towering legal burden" required to support a mandamus, the school district and its lawyers cited law that was "at best, inapposite," and chose to "mischaracterize the facts and law and engage in wild, unsupportable accusations."

The inference the DA's office drew from that tactic in its motion to dismiss: "The American justice system has long observed that how an individual reacts when confronted reflects not only the veracity of the confronting facts, but also the lack of credibility of the one confronted. Georgia law contains voluminous authority for the admissibility of 'adoptive admissions,' 'admissions by conduct' and 'admissions by silence.'

"Applying those principles to this case would lead to one, inescapable conclusion: The school district 'is wrong, they know it and went forward anyway.'"

The case is DeKalb County School District v. James, and Heery Int'l, intervenor, No. 11CV4122.

Correction: The May 4 story "DA: 'Bad faith' in schools case," about the DeKalb County School District's civil litigation, reported that DeKalb Deputy Chief Assistant District Attorney John Melvin during a hearing retracted an earlier statement indicating a petition for mandamus was the appropriate vehicle by which to resolve an aspect of the dispute. Melvin's position is that he maintained that mandamus was the proper vehicle, but said during the hearing that even mandamus would not work because of the right the school system was attempting to exert. Also in this story, the Daily Report reported that David Rubinger was a spokesman for DLA Piper. Rubinger is a spokesman for Heery International, Inc., DLA Piper's client.

===
Reprinted with permission from Daily Report

Could it be? A judge has ordered mediation in the Heery Mitchell case. Please, let this work out.

From the AJC

Judge orders mediation in DeKalb schools suit

Citing millions of dollars of legal fees, a judge ordered DeKalb County schools to mediate its case with construction giant Heery International.

The school system has spent more than $15.5 million in legal expenses in an ongoing civil suit with Heery/E.R. Mitchell over management of the school’s construction program. On Tuesday, DeKalb Superior Court Judge Clarence Seeliger ordered the parties to attend mediation.

“I’m worried that we will continue to accrue more attorney fees,” the judge told the parties. “This has grown far, far too expensive for the parties, and one party is the school board. Taxpayers are paying for this. Mediation is the best way to get this resolved."

Thank you! I agree Judge Seeliger! Please, save the taxpayers of DeKalb from this abyss!

Sadly, though, the school system attorney's response just sounds like fightin' words:

“The parties got a stern instruction from the judge to go to mediation," school lawyer Ray Persons said Tuesday. "We welcome any opportunity to discuss the resolution of the case to get the taxpayers’ compensation for the wrongdoing that has been done by Heery/Mitchell.

Say "Goodbye" to Two More Teachers or Three Paras

So it continues. Today's AJC is reporting that our school system has agreed to pay up to $100,000 for Pat (Pope) Reid's legal fees. $100,000 would pay for almost two teachers (with benefits) or three paras (100 paras were cut from last year's budget—people who work directly with children every single day at very low pay.)

DeKalb schools to hire another law firm

Gary Freed, of Atlanta firm RobbinsFreed, said Monday that he filed an appearance with the court to represent former chief operating officer Patricia Reid. Freed said the school board was expected to approve his contract Monday night, but are now citing a possible conflict of interest.

District spokesman Jeff Dickerson said the board will hire a firm on Monday, but legal fees will be capped at $100,000.

This will be the fourth law firm the DeKalb school board has hired to help with the suit. Heery sued the district in 2007, alleging breach of contract. The district filed a counter-suit for $100 million, alleging fraud and mismanagement of school construction projects. The school system has already paid $15.5 million in legal fees in the case.

Reid was indicted last year on charges she ran a criminal enterprise at the school system.

This can't be good

This is from the agenda for the DCSS Board meeting on Monday. They are going to executive session to discuss a legal matter and then this is on the agenda. By the way, the meeting this month is a combined work and business meeting which means that this will most likely be voted on Monday night. It is an action item, so unless they vote to table it or remove it from the agenda, they are going to vote on it.

Approval of Legal Representation
Quick Summary / Abstract
Presented by: Mr. Thomas E. Bowen, Chair

Contacts
Mr. Thomas E. Bowen, Chair, 404.392.1621

Requested Action
It is requested that the Board of Education approve the law firm of _________ to represent former Board Members Cassandra M. Anderson-Littlejohn, Lynn Cherry Grant, Frances Edwards, Chip Franzoini, Bebe Joyner, Zepora Roberts and current Board Member Sarah Copelin-Wood. _________ will be the lead attorney, and the hourly rate will be ____ for partners and ___ for associates, plus expenses.

Motion by: _________________
Seconded by: _________________
Vote: ___________

(Certainly this has to do with the recent AJC report stating that 17 people could be added to the Heery-Mitchell lawsuit.)

Ruling could cost DeKalb schools millions more in legal fees


===

Will we ever get around to spending money in the classroom? I can't believe that when I suggest buying Kindles or iPads for every student, I get more or less laughed at as if I were suggesting a financial impossibility. However, money for lawyers just has no limit.

Pitiful - more money down the tubes (or up the lawyers)

Ruling could cost DeKalb schools millions more in legal fees

DeKalb County taxpayers likely will have to pay millions of dollars more in legal fees in the school district's civil suit against a construction manager, which could include funding representation for ex-superintendent Crawford Lewis, because of a federal court ruling.

This is the latest setback for the DeKalb County School System in its $100 million civil suit against its former construction manager Heery/Mitchell.

On Tuesday, a federal judge granted the company’s request to send the case back to DeKalb County Superior Court, where it originated. In November, the school system had the case moved to federal court in an effort to circumvent DeKalb Superior Court Judge Clarence Seeliger's decision to enable Heery/Mitchell to sue 17 individuals, in addition to the school system.

As it stands, the district will have to pay for its own legal bills and provide lawyers for those 17 individuals, including Lewis, former chief operating officer Patricia Reid and members of the 2006 school board.

The school system already has spent more than $15.5 million in trial preparation for the suit. The judge's decision could cost several more million dollars, board chairman Tom Bowen said.

===

Funny, that's just about the same amount all of this redistricting is supposed to save! It's now a ZERO SUM GAME. (Well, unless you're King & Spalding)

Read the rest at the AJC if you can stand it.

Rut row! The Heery/Mitchell lawsuit has moved to federal court

Hot off the AJC online press: DeKalb schools move lawsuit to federal court

After spending an astounding $15.5 million in trial preparation, DeKalb County school officials will attempt to cut down on additional legal expenses by moving a lawsuit against construction manager Heery/Mitchell to federal court.

On Monday, the school board opted to transfer the suit from DeKalb County Superior Court to federal court, schools spokesman Walter Woods told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

The board requested the transfer on the same day a DeKalb judge signed an order allowing Heery/Mitchell to sue individual school board members, former superintendent Crawford Lewis and other administrators. The suit previously named only the school district. . . .

“We’re trying to take the route that will get us to court the soonest," Bowen said. "The federal docket is managed much tighter to keep cases from moving. The faster we get to trial, the less expensive it will be.”

Even with the change in venue, Bowen anticipates the trial won't be scheduled for another year.

$15.5 million! (Heavy) Sigh!

The latest on the Heery Mitchell lawsuit

There is no embed code yet for this latest report by Richard Belcher, so just click the photo and it will take you to WSB's website.

It's very disheartening. And shocking - I'm choking -- did Richard Belcher say that we have already spent $15.5 MILLION on the Heery Mitchell case??? And we haven't yet seen a courtroom??? Where is this in the budget? To whom was this much money paid (this could only have been paid within the last year or two!!) And how much will the trial add to this cost???

I'd love to see Belcher's data - where did he get this info from??

How many books could that have bought? Roofs fixed? Computers? A/C units? This is so sad.

At least the lawyers are getting rich...

This is the latest sickening, disheartening news uncovered by the AJC.

DeKalb schools overspent on lawyers

DeKalb County schools spent six times what they had budgeted for legal expenses last year and have stalled on looking for a new attorney.

Records obtained by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution show the troubled school system paid lawyers $5,792,239 from July 1, 2009 t0 June 30, 2010. That includes money for 16 firms, although the district’s budget only calls for two firms.

The legal bills -- which were more than the those of Cobb, Fulton and Clayton schools combined -- come at a time when DeKalb is cutting tens of millions out of its budget and laying off hundreds of school employees.

Click this link to read the entire article. But get a tissue first.

So, how is the civil case between DCSS and Heery Mitchell coming along?

We’ve been having a discussion on an unrelated thread about the civil case between DCSS and Heery Mitchell so I thought I’d try to do a little research and bring us up to date on what is known. This is very complicated now that Crawford Lewis, Patricia Reid (Pope), Vincent (Tony) Pope and Cointa Moody have been indicted on RICO charges.

A recent article in the Daily Report, a very expensive law rag, has cleared the air on some of the facts of these cases. I will simply bullet-point what I learned. I can’t reprint or offer a link, as this is a corporate magazine and available only by subscription. Lawyers who subscribe can read it in the June 17, 2010 issue. The article is entitled “School case has a civil side”.

Key points are below:

• Heery Mitchell International and E.R. Mitchell Co. originally sued the DeKalb school district for $1.5 million for breach of contract.
• The DeKalb county school system countersued for more than $100 million.
• The countersuit accuses Heery/Mitchell, etc of civil racketeering violations, including submitting fraudulent invoices, running projects repeatedly over budget and mismanaging the school construction program.
• In March, after superintendent of schools Crawford Lewis and COO, head of construction for DCSS, Pat Reid (FKA: Pope) were publicly accused of criminal activity regarding construction contracts, Heery/Mitchell added to their claim, accusing Lewis and Reid of dumping them as construction managers in order to steer business to favored vendors.
• The criminal indictments have already delayed the lawsuit, which was supposed to go to trial in June.
• The criminal charges also put our county government in conflicting positions – with school officials defending their contracts and bidding process in the HM civil suit, while county prosecutors build a case against former school system leaders claiming bribery and other charges.
• King & Spalding is representing the school system in the civil case and claim that the criminal charges have nothing to do with their civil suit. They also say that Heery Mitchell is using the criminal lawsuit to deflect attention from their own poor job of managing $1 billion of construction.
• Heery Mitchell’s attorney, Mark Grantham of DLA Piper stated that the criminal charges show that Heery Mitchell’s termination may have actually been due to the school administrator’s scheme to engage in criminal conduct.
• The Heery International v DeKalb County School District case has 1,053 docket entries that include depositions sought or taken of Lewis, Reid, Pope and Moody. The sealed deposition of Reid, is 7 inches thick.
• Included in the indictment is an attempt by Lewis to stall the criminal probe because he feared the criminal probe investigation might damage the school system's defense in the Heery/Mitchell suit.
• The HM contract was terminated in February 2007.
• "Heery was able to—and did—take advantage of its superior knowledge and experience in construction-related matters to mislead employees of the School District ... concerning the effectiveness of Heery/Mitchell's management of the program," wrote John W. Hinchey, another King & Spalding attorney on the school system's defense team.
• Some of the projects Heery/Mitchell were accused of mismanaging are now part of the criminal case against Lewis, Reid, Pope and Moody. They include the McNair Cluster Elementary School, the Mountain Industrial Center and the Miller Grove projects.
• The indictment and pleadings by Heery/Mitchell show that Reid's hiring coincided with an overhaul of vendors involved in the school system's construction program.
• In 2006, Lewis asked the school board to vote to replace an auditor that had given Heery/Mitchell a glowing report the previous year, telling the board the move was "an emergency," according to the plaintiffs.
• MGT of America in a May 2005 audit reported that "an overall on-time and within budget completion in the face of a nearly 20 percent funding shortfall is evidence of the professionalism and experience of the Heery/Mitchell Joint Venture."..."The [school system] is to be commended for hiring a competent agency representative," MGT concluded.
• Lewis wanted Rubino & McGeehin of Bethesda, Md., to become the new auditor, and its 2006 report was highly critical of Heery/Mitchell, although it did not accuse the companies of fraud. (The state also issued a report on an audit available at this link.)
• On April 19, 2006, according to Heery/Mitchell, Pat Reid informed the construction partners their contract had been suspended until further notice. She also ordered the contractors off school property by the end of the work day.
• The following day, according to the indictment, C.D. Moody Construction Co. was awarded the $11.9 million contract for McNair Cluster Elementary. The company's owner, Charles David Moody, was a close family friend of Reid and Pope, according to the indictment.
• C.D. Moody listed Vernell Barnes as the project's "architect of record.” But prosecutors say it was Vincent Pope (Reid’s then husband), not Barnes, who did most of the substitute architectural work. Pope tried to cover his involvement in the project in an email that is part of the evidence.
• In all, Pope was paid $2.4 million for which he was not entitled, prosecutors allege. That includes $445,000 for work Pope never did for the Columbia project.
• Reid, Lewis and Moody are also accused of theft and soliciting bribes in the form of tens of thousands of dollars in tickets to major sporting events.
• Lewis' indictment also includes a count of obstruction of justice when he asked the assistant DA to “table” the criminal investigation out of fear that it would harm the civil case

===
The civil case Heery International v. DeKalb County School District, is No. 07CV2532 and is before DeKalb Superior Court Judge Clarence F. Seeliger.

UPDATES:

Additional stories on the subject are available at these links:

DA: 'Bad faith' in schools case

K&S will remain on schools case: More on the story

Are we gearing up for a trial yet?

Dim excuses for outrageous behaviors

I hate to say it, but our school leaders just don't seem to be all that bright when it comes to everyday, ordinary life skills.

First, we have a superintendent who swears that he panicked when he accidentally pumped premium gas into his car. (Which, as most of us are aware, will not harm your car in any way. Besides, isn't "premium" a synonym for "premier"?  Lewis should have known there's no difference between premium and regular!) Anyway - he was so freaked that he said he actually says he got "someone" to get a rubber hose and pump it out. We never learn exactly where the gas was pumped, or by whom, but if this story is true, some bloke had the last laugh–and a free tank of gas!

Now, his sidekick, "COO" and director of construction, apparently never realized she didn't get a divorce from her first husband before marrying her second!  To which I say, "Yeah, right."

"Puhleeze!!! Enough is enough!" "Uncle!!!"

======

An aside in the same article:

Last month, investigators searched DeKalb Schools Superintendent Crawford Lewis’ home and school offices as part of a search warrant. After the search, District Attorney Gwen Keyes Fleming said she needed 90 days to wrap up the probe.

The district attorney declined to say if Pope’s pending annulment would affect the investigation, which is slated to be wrapped up in less than three months.

"We are on schedule to complete the investigation by the end of May," district attorney's spokesman Orzy Theus said Monday.

Well, so much for a trial in March. Keyes is now claiming that they are "on schedule" but need 90 more days. Huh? This thing is going to fizzle into nothing. I have no confidence that we will see anything happen except a whole bunch of tax dollars spent on lawyers and maybe a judgement that will barely recover those attorney's fees.

In addition, I am incredibly disappointed in the board, who will not take a single action against Lewis and Pope, and allow them to continue collecting full salaries and benefits from the taxpayers.

To quote one of our regular contributors, "Cynical? Yes!"

The Heery/Mitchell Backstory

I'm going to create a thread that only discusses and links items about the Pat Pope, DCSS, Heery/Mitchell construction case. The trial is scheduled to begin in March, so there should be plenty to report in the coming months. We will provide links to stories as they become available in this post. Stay tuned!

This story was first brought to our attention just about one year ago, when Dr. Lewis suddenly decided to ask the DeKalb District Attorney to investigate the office of Pat Pope (COO and head of construction for DeKalb schools). Basically, one day seemingly out of the blue last December, the DeKalb County DA stormed Pope’s office and confiscated her computers along with other work items. Dr. Lewis, who asked for the investigation, said he would reveal results in one week. Months later, we were told that the DA was very busy and the results would not be available until May.

This small story was mentioned two months later in the Community Briefs in the Metro Atlanta Journal Constitution on Saturday, Feb. 21, 2009.

The results finally of the allegations of irregularities with DeKalb County School’s construction contracts, in Pat Pope’s office, have finally been forwarded, to the district attorney’s office. The school system forwarded this review to the district attorney’s office and requested that “a few things” to be looked into, to make sure a criminal investigation was not necessary. The school system would not cite specifics because the investigation was still open and ongoing.

A month later, the AJC reported the following,

Probe into school construction contracts continues
By KRISTINA TORRES
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Tuesday, March 24, 2009

It may be at least May before we learn the results of an internal review into allegations of irregularities with DeKalb County school construction contracts, according to a spokeswoman with the district attorney’s office.

The school system forwarded the review to the D.A., asking that a few things be looked into and whether a criminal investigation was warranted.

An investigator in the district attorney’s office is juggling the schools review along with several other cases, said D.A. spokeswoman Jada Hudspeth, and it may take until May to complete them all.

Hudspeth declined to give specifics about the schools review. It involves the office of Patricia Pope, the school system’s chief operating officer. In December, school system police officers and information systems employees examined records from Pope’s office.

Then all was fairly quiet, until one day in October, when Atlanta Unfiltered published an update on the situation. This was the first time that the public heard the "little investigation" was actually "complex and enormous". We created a discussion thread at the time called "The Pat Pope Debacle".

DA: DeKalb school construction probe ‘complex & enormous’
Atlanta Unfiltered
October 5, 2009
In March, the DA’s office said the investigation might not be completed for a couple months. ...Seven months later … “The case is complex and enormous in scope which is resulting in an extended investigation. We will share our findings when we complete the investigation,” Keyes-Fleming said Friday in a e-mailed statement in response to Atlanta Unfiltered’s questions.

October 14th, Ella reported that the GBI will now assist the DA with the investigation.

Then, on October 22, Kim reported (from a highly reliable source) that Pope had been "relieved of her duties". Everyone assumed that meant fired, but we later discovered that it only meant they were going to hire a team of consultants to replace her while she served out her contract in a barren office at another location.

On November 3, during the school board meeting, Fox 5 News reported on the construction management change. Of course, this was not discussed at the board meeting at all.

Recently, on November 16, Atlanta Unfiltered reported,
DeKalb construction probe complicates multimillion-dollar suit on cost overruns

DeKalb County schools’ multimillion-dollar damage suit over construction cost overruns may be undermined by a criminal probe of school contracts.
The school district has been locked in a court struggle nearing epic proportions since it suspended its construction management firm, Heery/Mitchell, in 2006. What began with the contractor’s claim for roughly $500,000 for unpaid invoices has escalated to the point that DeKalb, in a counterclaim, seeks damages of up to $125 million for mismanagement. The file for the court case is more than five feet thick.

This week, The Champion published a story about Heery/Mitchell requesting copies of the seized documents.

Construction firm wants access to seized school district documents
Written By: Jonathan Cribbs
11/27/09

A years-long lawsuit between the DeKalb County School System and a construction firm became more complicated this month after the company demanded access to documents seized by investigators last month in a separate probe.

Heery/Mitchell, a management firm that formerly worked for DeKalb schools, believes it was removed from the district’s SPLOST II and SPLOST III construction programs in 2006 so the district’s chief operations officer, Pat Pope, could take over the projects. Pope’s office has been the subject of a county investigation into contracting irregularities, and investigators seized documents from a district building in Tucker where she works on Oct. 13. The office of her husband, Anthony Pope, an architect who has designed several county schools, was also searched.

The school system booted Heery/Mitchell, citing cost overruns at several projects, including McNair and Henderson Mill elementary schools, Arabia Mountain and Columbia high schools and the Mountain Industrial Center. When Heery/Mitchell sued, looking for owed payments, the school system filed counterclaims, seeking tens of millions of dollars in damages.

In court documents filed earlier this month, Heery/Mitchell attorneys said they need to see the documents investigators seized because they contain evidence.

==========================================
Stay tuned and please add information in the comments as it becomes available.