October 12, 2003 at 3:42 pm #1353
We are currently in the process of compiling all court records and other documents in this most important case. We believe property owners will find these documents very interesting.October 12, 2003 at 7:13 pm #1494
A real poker game
Well I started with Supreme Court of MS. No. 199-CA-00484SCT or
It should never have happened. It is the perfect example of a ‘****ing’contest gone wrong. Why these professionals cannot simply handle situations in a professional way I just don’t understand. Too often it comes down to “I have the power so I will throw it around”
Guess what. Sometimes people throw it right back. It is still a waste of time and money. Professional people should behave professionally. Directors are not elected to play God, they are elected to serve the residents and property owners of Diamondhead.
Excellent info. Of course the case was a giant mess. It appears the individuals’ attorneys did not advise them well. None-the-less the result was a settlement . More like a real good poker game.
To all those interested in ‘Justice’. It is truly hard to come by without
good advise. But Justice doesnt necessarily always start with an attorney. Go with the purdent man ideal. It is almost a do unto others ideal.
Complain directly to the individual you have a problem with. Document the event. Give them an opportunity to make the change or do something ridiculous as is the case so often. Then try again. stick with ‘do unto other’ an give them another opportunity to change. document again.
By the way, It is unfortunate but it would be a good idea to have several witnesses if possible or some other means of proving what was actually said. Good honest people will lie.
The divide and conquer rule is currently being used in Diamondhead. Don’t let them make it quite so easy. Try to picture in your mind the question:
now who really benefits from this.October 12, 2003 at 7:55 pm #1496
There has been a lot of misinformation concerning this case and not enough questions. This was a very important case in not only Diamondhead, but for the entire state. It shows definatively that the MS Supreme Court could completely disreguard the laws of the state of Mississippi and bow to the wishes of a political crony. Here are some of the questions:
Why did the POA board at that time refuse the legal team provided by the insurance company under a policy paid for by member dues and paid more money for a politically connected attorney?
Why did the POA board steer every court case it had in front of the now disgraced “honorable” Tom Teel?
Did a POA board member, a former appointed judge, have a conflict of interest in the matter?
Why did the POA attorney at the time completely misrepresent the fee structure of the POA?
Why did the POA have on its “Legal Committee” at the time a man who was fired immediately after an audit of the hospital he had administered after 18 years?
The defense of this case by the Cronvich board made it impossible for the POA membership to prevail against Purcell for back and future dues . It was done because a member of the board with considerable influence in Mississippi judicial circles had a vendetta against the Longanecker’s attorney. We will publish the complete briefs in this case and other documents in our possession and let you decide. We know the facts and we will publish them, all of them.October 13, 2003 at 5:25 pm #1499
This is the kind of information that is so needed. Too many secrets are causing too many bad decisions. As far as the possibility of corrupt judicial is concerned. I am so NOT shocked.February 26, 2004 at 7:59 pm #1624
Thanks for the information you are providing in this forum. As new residents of Diamondhead, we are learning quickly that the POA is not much different from some of the politics we have in this State, run by a select and elite few who want to benefit the haves at the expense of the have nots.
Keep us informed so that we can decide whether we would want incorporation or remain under the tyranical Diamondhead Country Club and Property Owner’s Association. We plan to be at the Annual meeting of the Board in June!
Rick and RickApril 30, 2013 at 8:55 pm #4788
The link does not work I would like to read the caseNovember 6, 2013 at 5:22 pm #1352
Is this case the one pertaining to the 10% quorum ?
Where are the links to the PDFs ?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.