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

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

But I have said what I wish to.  I had zero intention of bringing it up
again on my own.  This whole situation is horrid with a lot of people being
placed in difficult positions they should not have been including
contractors and staff.

I would like to see that written opinion of a parliamentarian.  I’m
confident Ms Mattson would like to see it as well.

On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 9:22 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
wrote:

> The LNC is the client.  The opinion was shared publicly.  Our chair should
> have shared it privately for comment first.  It already is in the public
> eye.
>
> I do not keep things secret from the members that they have a right to
> know.  I had no intention of bringing it up again but here it is.
>
> I do not discuss things in secret session with rare exception.  My
> position is that our chair put Mr. Hall in an untenable position.
>
> Who is the parliamentarian?
>
> On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 8:35 PM Francis Wendt <francis.wendt at lp.org> wrote:
>
>> Madam Secretary,
>>
>> This topic came up during my dinner this evening, and as a legal
>> professional you should know that malpractice is brought by a client
>> against their legal council. If your intent, then, is to pursue a legal
>> malpractice case against Mr. Hall, who has as he stated received the
>> opinion of a parliamentarian, that will have to be an issue decided upon
>> by either the Chair or the LNC as a whole.
>>
>> In short, this is not something that should be in the public eye, but
>> rather executive session. I kindly request that we bring this matter up
>> there, because this back and forth is very damaging to the confidence
>> the public may have in our party.
>>
>> There is a proper time and place for all matters. This is not the time.
>> this is not the place. Please, hear my words.
>>
>> Respectfully,
>>
>> ---
>> FRANCIS WENDT
>> LNC Region 1 Alternate
>>   406.595.5111
>>
>> On 2020-05-08 20:12, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business 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. *
>
> --

*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. *