S.C. SUPREME COURT DISBARS FORMER WPA BOARD ATTORNEY

The Wedgefield Examiner has provided the announcement of the disbarment of former WPA board attorney of record William Moody.  This comes at a time when you should have more questions regarding the actions your board took during the September 2014 board meeting.  Why?  Moody was the board attorney of record who came to that position, under questionable circumstances.  Moody, for the most part was the attorney of record, from the beginning, regarding the litigation and the canal lot owner who refused to pay his assessment.  Several months ago, when Moody's license was suspended, your board hired his partner, from a two man office.  When questioned about that, your board said they didn't want to have to start all over again and pay another law office to catch up.  Then, after months, the board moved to another attorney, saying Moody's partner had done nothing for them.  In the mean time, RUMOR is that there was a misstep in following appeals, etc., and your board had to try and play catch up.  Even without the rumor, the decision by the S.C. Supreme Court, should cause you to further question just what happened regarding this case.  I strongly believe that there is more to this case, that your board doesn't want you to know. 

The Wedgefield Examiner has suggested questions, in previous article, that you might ask certain board members.  Here are a few questions that you might want to ask Legal Chair Garrison.

*Ask him to allow you to review the complete legal file on the case of the canal resident who failed to pay his dredging assessment litigation.  Remember, Compliance Chair DeMarchi, applied, in writing, to a resident, state law regarding review of files and copies..  It is you right under state law.

*Ask Legal Chair Garrison whether there was ever a time in the history of the litigation, that the board won, as in the resident had to pay?

*Ask Legal Chair Garrison whether after it was ruled that the resident had to pay (if that was the case), whether the resident appealed the ruling?

*Ask Legal Chair Garrison, if there was an appeal by the resident, what happened?  Was there a place in time, after the appeal was filed by the resident (if that was the case), that the board, or the board attorney failed to act, as required by litigation standards, and the court/referee found in favor of the resident not having to pay, by default of actions by either the board, or the board attorney of record, placing the board in the position of having to take further action, resulting in the September 2014 Legal Committee vote.