[Lnc-business] Recent Comments Concerning My Representation of the LNC

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

Mr. Phillips, my issue is not with the legal opinion but with the
parliamentary opinion.  That is a separate field requiring years of
intensive study.  There are experts in that field.

I would also be just as critical of a PRP who gave a legal opinion instead
of restricting their analysis to parliamentary analysis.

Ms. Mattson is a PRP and she pointed out a very fundamental error made by
Mr. Hall.  Before studying for the RP exam I could easily have made that
same error.

On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 8:12 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
wrote:

> Mr. Hall I remain of that opinion.  I am a legal professional myself and I
> know fully well that you are not adequately versed in parliamentary law.
> There are several examples of that in the opinion.
>
> Further, you also know texts do not appear in isolation and seeing how I
> had to send you a copy of RONR the day before, I hardly think that is a
> careful study.  I have studied RONR for four years now and am barely
> qualified.  There are experts in this field and the LNC should have
> consulted one.
>
> The most glaringly error was that interpretative principles were loosely
> goosey suggestions.  They are not.
>
> Your opinion was rendered publicly and is being used.  My opposition and
> opinion are similarly public.
>
> I do not feel the interests of the entire LNC are being represented but
> the personal agenda of our chair.
>
> That is my opinion.  And in my position as an officer of this Party, if I
> think we are being poorly served in this area I must say so.
>
> I had a similar opinion back when we were not advised of the “eternal
> secrecy clause” in the Johnson contract as well.
>
> I may be the only one saying this.  I’m not the only one thinking it.
>
> I wouldn’t be so shocked by it if your work was not stellar in everything
> else.  Which it is.
>
> If that opinion had been presented to the LNC in private, I would have
> given mine in private but it was sprung on us.
>
> There is NO RP or PRP that I know that would agree with your opinion.  If
> it were correct we have been abusing members for the past decade as there
> has Shasta been requests for online conventions and they were told our
> bylaws do not permit it.  And then poof!  It magically appears when our
> chair wants it.
>
> Find a PRP to support your opinion.  You won’t be able to.
>
> If you had limited it to an “emergency reading” it would be different but
> you are actually claiming that this option was there all along with only a
> slight nod to an emergency reading.
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 5:05 PM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business <
> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>
>> Mr Hall I see no issue with you rendering a legal opinion when asked.
>> That is after all what we pay you for.
>>
>> I noted your unwillingness to pick an option on LPTV and thought your
>> actions were exactly as they should have been.
>>
>> Thank you for your diligent service.  Other's expert opinions do not
>> prevent you from offering yours as part of your contracted duties.
>>
>>
>> John Phillips
>> Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>> Cell 217-412-5973
>>
>> On May 8, 2020 5:51 PM, Oliver Hall via Lnc-business <
>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Libertarian National Committee Members:
>>
>> I generally refrain from posting to this list unless it relates to LNC
>> legal matters, but Ms. Harlos' recent comments pertaining to me require
>> a response.
>>
>> First, Ms. Harlos has suggested that it was improper for me to render a
>> legal opinion on whether the LNC bylaws permit an online convention, and
>> that I am "in danger of malpractice" for rendering the opinion that I
>> did. That is incorrect.
>>
>> As counsel to the LNC, I am routinely called upon to construe contracts
>> and other legal instruments and to provide legal opinions about them. My
>> retainer agreement with the LNC expressly states that one of my duties
>> is to "Construe the Libertarian Party Bylaws and other governing
>> documents of the LNC." That is what I did here.
>>
>> In addition, the legal opinion that I gave is based on a careful review
>> of the Bylaws, relevant provisions of Roberts Rules and other
>> authorities, including the written opinion of a professional
>> parliamentarian. My conclusion that the Bylaws do not prohibit an online
>> convention is consistent with the text of the Bylaws, which are silent
>> on the matter, and supported by the foregoing authorities. Furthermore,
>> my conclusion was narrowly tailored: my opinion states that such a
>> construction of the Bylaws is "disfavored" and should not be adopted
>> except in emergency circumstances. Disagreement with that conclusion
>> does not justify mischaracterizing it as malpractice.
>>
>> I should also emphasize that I did not and would not advocate for any of
>> the options the LNC is considering. Instead, I reviewed each option and
>> identified the legal issues and risks that each one raises. That is what
>> the LNC retained me to do, and I have been doing it in multiple contexts
>> for nearly five years. I represent the entire LNC. As such, I have a
>> duty of loyalty to the LNC. I would never betray that duty.
>>
>> Any suggestion that I have committed malpractice, or that I would breach
>> my duty of loyalty to my client, the Libertarian National Committee, is
>> a serious accusation. It is also wrong, as a matter of fact and as a
>> matter of law. That such accusations were made in a public forum is
>> gravely disappointing to me. More important, it is a distraction at a
>> time when I should be focusing on the critical legal work that the LNC
>> and state party affiliates nationwide need me to do.
>>
>> It remains my honor and privilege to serve the LNC as your counsel, and
>> I look forward to returning to that work immediately. Thank you for your
>> time and consideration.
>>
>> -Oliver
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>
> *In Liberty,*
>
> * Personal Note:  I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome
> (part of the autism spectrum).  This can affect inter-personal
> communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas.  If anyone
> found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux
> pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
>
> --

*In Liberty,*

* Personal Note:  I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome
(part of the autism spectrum).  This can affect inter-personal
communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas.  If anyone
found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux
pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *