Did You Know All Aboard Florida Threatened Martin and Indian River County, FL Attorney’s with Lawsuits?

stearns-weaver-miller-2015-cmykthick

ON AUGUST 24, 2015, THROUGH THEIR MIAMI LAW FIRM, ALL ABOARD FLORIDA PLAYED TOUGH BY THREATENING INDIAN RIVER COUNTY (IRC) ATTORNEY DYLAN REINGOLD AND MARTIN COUNTY ATTORNEY MICHAEL DURHAM WITH LAWSUITS OVER FEDERAL AND STATE SECURITIES LAW VIOLATIONS.

In his August 24, 2015 letter to the IRC and Martin County Attorneys,  Attorney Eugene E. Stearns of Stearns Weaver Miller Weissler Alhadeff & Sitterson, PA wrote that:

“I just learned some disturbing information. During the afternoon of August 13, 2015, two individuals associated with Indian River and Martin County anti-train groups accessed the All Aboard Florida New Roadshow on false pretenses and gained confidential information to which they were not entitled…it would appear that these two individuals were acting at the County’s behest and then shared what they learned with County representatives despite a legal obligation not to disclose it.  That information included the date on which the PAB’s (Private Activity Bonds) are to be priced – August 25.”

[Publisher’s note.  IRC Attorney Reinhold was not at the Roadshow event and does not know what the confidential information was.]

Attorney Stearns continued.

“With what we now know, it seems evident that Indian River and Martin Counties are engaged in a conspiracy to improperly influence the sale of PAB’s in violation of the anti fraud provisions of Federal and State securities laws.   During last week’s IRC Board of Commissioners meeting, County officials made a series of false statements about FEC, AAF, and the project itself, with full knowledge of the pending securities transaction.

It is one thing for the Counties to express general opposition to the Project.  But it is quite another for them to engage in a coordinated attempt to influence a pending securities transaction, through the dissemination of false information and other means.

It would seem that you and other County representatives involved in this do not appreciate  the gravity of your transgressions.  You will be well advised to start considering the consequences of your actions before you exacerbate your liability any further.”

And that was that.

threaten

2 thoughts on “Did You Know All Aboard Florida Threatened Martin and Indian River County, FL Attorney’s with Lawsuits?

  1. A number of years ago we were told by someone who had been in the railroad biz that FEC had a rep in the industry for not playing above board. We also knew that with the head of Fortress Investment, Wes Edens, putting $75 million of his own money in the development of LNG plants in FL and millions of corporate money on the line, they wouldn’t walk away quietly. They need double track, modern freight capacity and they need OPM (other people’s money) to do it. So we were not surprised when they not only threatened our county attorney but also other elected officials and train fighters over the years.

    Now with the new legislation that would require them to PAY for the expansion and maintenance, they are threatening lawsuits if it passes. This dangerous, tax-subsidized project should have never gotten this far but for a corrupt US DOT and a questionable state admInistration. Now that they may actually have to pay to make it safe and make it conform to normal HSR standards, they threaten more lawsuits. It’s time for our elected officials at all levels to make them pay or leave town. Enough is enough!

    Like

  2. The legislation referred to should never pass. If it does, it will be stricken by the courts.

    It will also guarantee other railroads will not be used for passenger service (Amtrak will never resume service from Jacksonville to New Orleans if that legislation passes because CSX will never take on those additional costs). The proposed bill usurps federal authority over railroad operations and could result in railroads shutting down crossings over many right-of-way’s that are granted at the pleasure of the railroad. If CSX were exempt, it would then be fought on the basis of targeting a single entity (the courts take a dim view of such legislative tactics).

    It is not good form to use hearsay to make an argument or cast aspersions on others (“A number of years ago we were told by someone …”).

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s