Preview
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWELFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, IN AND FOR SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA
McCANN HOLDINGS, LTD.,
Plaintiff, CASE NO: 2011CA003897NC
Vv.
SDC COMMUNITIES, INC.,
VOTT-A, LLC, VOTT-B, LLC,
VOTT-C, LLC, VOTT-D, LLC,
HENRY RODRIGUEZ, and
RANDALL BENDERSON
Defendants.
/
ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT
Defendants, VOTT-A, LLC, VOTT-B, LLC, VOTT-C, LLC, and VOTT-D, LLC
(collectively “VOTT”), and RANDALL BENDERSON (“Benderson’) by and through their
undersigned attorneys, hereby file their Answer and Affirmative Defenses to the Third
Amended Complaint and states as follows:
1. Admitted.
2. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
3. Admitted.
4. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
5. Admitted that Benderson resides in Sarasota County, Florida and acted on
behalf of VOTT. Otherwise denied.
6. Admitted.
7. Admitted that this is an action for damages and other relief. Otherwise,
Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 1 of 10without knowledge and therefore denied.
8. Admitted that the Laws of Florida, Chapter 2009-89 speak for themselves.
9, Without knowledge and therefore denied.
10. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
11. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
12. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
13. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
14. Admitted.
15. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
16. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
17. Admitted.
18. Admitted that Exhibit A speaks for itself.
19. Admitted that a meeting was held on or about June 23, 2010 and that Exhibit
A speaks for itself. Otherwise, without knowledge and therefore denied.
20. Admitted that Exhibit A speaks for itself. Otherwise, without knowledge and
therefore denied.
21. Denied that counsel for VOTT acted for third parties other than VOTT, and
denied that the Agreement was the subject of communications to the BCC at the public
hearing. Otherwise, without knowledge and therefore denied.
22. Admitted that an ORC Report was prepared by DCA. Otherwise, without
knowledge and therefore denied.
23. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
24. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 2 of 1025. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
26. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
2/. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
28. Denied.
29. Denied.
30. Admitted that the BCC deferred adoption of the Amendment. Otherwise
denied.
31. Denied. The Amendment has not been denied, or, alternatively, any denial is
the fault of McCann.
32. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
33. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only.
34. VOTT and Benderson reallege and restate their answers to paragraphs 1
through 32 above as if fully restated herein.
35. Admitted that the Agreement is recorded in the public records. Otherwise,
without knowledge and therefore denied.
36. Admitted.
3/7. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
38. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
39. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
40. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only.
41. VOTT realleges and restates its answers to paragraphs 1 through 32 above
as if fully restated herein.
42. Admitted that the Agreement speaks for itself. Otherwise, without knowledge
Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 3 of 10and therefore denied.
43. Denied.
44. __ Denied.
45. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only.
46. VOTT realleges and restates its answers to paragraphs 1 through 32 above
as if fully restated herein.
47. Admitted that Exhibit A speaks for itself. Otherwise, without knowledge and
therefore denied.
48. Admitted that Exhibit A speaks for itself. Otherwise, without knowledge and
therefore denied.
49. Denied.
50. Denied.
51. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only.
52. Benderson realleges and restates its answers to paragraphs 1 through 31
above as if fully restated herein.
53. Admitted.
54. Denied.
55. Denied.
56. Denied.
5/7. Denied.
98. Denied.
59. Denied.
60. Denied.
Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 4 of 1061. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only.
62. | Benderson realleges and restates its answers to paragraphs 1 through 32
and 53 through 59 above as if fully restated herein.
63. | Benderson was authorized to take the actions that he did on behalf of VOTT.
Otherwise, without knowledge and therefore denied.
64. Denied.
65. Denied.
66. Denied.
67. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only.
68. VOTT realleges and restates its answers to paragraphs 1 through 31 above
as if fully restated herein.
69. VOTT agreed to allow its real property to be located within the EEZ.
Otherwise, without knowledge and therefore denied.
70. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
71. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
72. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
73. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
74. ~~ Denied.
75. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
76. Denied.
77. Denied.
78. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only.
79. Benderson realleges and restates its answers to paragraphs 1 through 31
Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 5 of 10above as if fully restated herein.
80. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
81. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
82. Admitted.
83. Denied.
84. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
85. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
86. Denied.
87. Denied.
88. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only.
89. Benderson realleges and restates its answers to paragraphs 1 through 31
above as if fully restated herein.
90. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
91. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
92. Denied.
93. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
94. Denied.
95. Denied.
96. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only.
97. VOTT and Benderson reallege and restate their answers to paragraphs 1
through 31 above as if fully restated herein.
98. Denied.
99. Benderson realleges and restates its answers to paragraphs 1 through 31
Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 6 of 10above as if fully restated herein.
100. Denied.
101. Admitted that Benderson and Rodriquez met alone on a Saturday. Otherwise
without knowledge and therefore denied.
102. Without knowledge and therefore denied.
103. Admitted that the Agreement is valid and enforceable. Otherwise, without
knowledge and therefore denied.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
104. McCann's claims in this matter are not ripe. The Amendment has not been
denied, nor has it been terminated by operation of law. Therefore, no cause of action can
arise at this time.
105. McCann waived its non-contractual claims in this matter by executing the
Agreement, and McCann waived its claims by not performing its obligations thereunder,
including the diligent pursuit of land use authorizations and entitlements as contemplated
therein.
106. McCann failed to perform and committed the first material breach of the
Agreement by not pursuing land use authorizations and entitlements in a manner that will
effectuate the terms of the Agreement. Specifically, McCann did not effectively or in good
faith pursue adoption of the Amendment, did not make material or substantive efforts to
respond to third party concerns or comments, failed to pursue entitlements following the
initial deferral by the BCC, and did not re-file or seek to rejuvenate the Amendment, or the
scope of land use authorizations and entitlements sought thereunder (hereinafter
“McCann's Failure To Act’).
-_7-
Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 7 of 10107. McCann has unclean hands and acted in bad faith by virtue of McCann's
Failure To Act.
108. The express covenant(s) of the Agreement controls, and is inconsistent with
the implied covenants alleged by McCann to have been breached. Therefore, no cause of
action can arise at this time for breach of good faith and fair dealing.
109. McCann’s claims for breach of implied obligation of good faith and fair dealing
are barred by the statute of frauds.
110. McCann's claims are barred by the Doctrine of Due Diligence by virtue of
McCann's Failure To Act; and that McCann did not justifiably rely upon VOTT to obtain
adoption of the Amendment.
111. The Agreement was partially performed in that Area 1 is now included within
the EEZ as established by Sarasota County, Florida.
112. The Agreement is enforceable as a result of McCann's ratification of the
Agreement as (i) Area 1 is included within the EEZ, and (ii) VOTT supported the
Amendment.
113. By virtue of the Agreement, McCann's claims are barred by the Economic
Loss Rule. Specifically (i) the fraud alleged by McCann is in the performance of the
Agreement and not the inducement thereof, and (ii) individual liability of an entity agent or
officer is inappropriate when the contract addresses a specific issue.
114. The actions by VOTT and Benderson are privileged, and McCann's claims
are barred by the Business Judgment Rule as all actions taken by VOTT and Benderson
were in the furtherance of the reasonable, justified, and recognized business interests of
VOTT.
Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 8 of 10115. Benderson is an improper party. Because VOTT has legitimate business
interests to protect and Benderson is the agent for VOTT, Benderson has been improperly
joined as an individual Defendant. The agent of an entity party acting within his capacity
and scope is not considered a separate entity.
116. Asanagent of VOTT, a party to the Agreement, Benderson cannot interfere
with the Agreement or an advantageous business relationship. Therefore, no cause of
action can arise at this time.
117. The Agreement is a settlement agreement of disputed claims and the actions
of VOTT and Benderson in connection therewith are privileged.
118. The actions of VOTT and Benderson are not the proximate cause of
McCann's claim of damages.
119. McCann failed to mitigate its damages, including by virtue of McCann's
Failure To Act.
120. McCann’s damages were caused in whole or in part by McCann’s own
negligence or the failure to exercise ordinary care, the actions of other individuals or
entities over whom VOTT and Benderson had no control, or as a result of McCann’s Failure
To Act.
121. McCann’s damages were the result of intervening or superseding events,
factors, occurrences, or conditions, which were in no way cause by or contributed by VOTT
or Benderson.
122. McCann is estopped from asserting its claims by virtue of McCann’s Failure
To Act, and any and all such other actions taken in detriment to the Agreement.
123. The existence of a public private partnership in connection with the approval
Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 9 of 10of a legislative act ts illegal and barred as a matter of law.
124. For matters not related to the Agreement or the performance thereunder,
VOTT and Benderson’s actions are protected by the First Amendment of the United States
Constitution.
/s/ Edward Vogler Il
EDWARD VOGLER II
Vogler Ashton, PLLC
2411-A Manatee Avenue West
Bradenton, FL 34205
Email: edvogler@voglerashton.com
(941) 388-9400 x104
(941) 866-7648 Fax
Florida Bar No. 0380970
Attorneys for VOTT and Benderson
edvogler@voglerashton.com
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished this
8th day of July, 2013, by Electronic Mail to: Steven D. Hutton, Esq., 240 S. Pineapple Avenue, Suite
801, Sarasota, Florida 34236 sdh@huttonlawfirm.com; pdominko@huttonlawfirm.com, and
noreen@huttonlawfirm.com, and Morgan R. Bentley, Esq. 783 S. Orange Avenue, Suite 220,
Sarasota, Florida 34236 mbentley@bentleyandbruning.com, nwhite@bentleyandbruning.com, and
handrews@bentleyandbruning.com.
___/s/ Edward Vogler II
EDWARD VOGLER II, ESQUIRE
Florida Bar No. 0380970
Vogler Ashton, PLLC
2411 — A Manatee Avenue West
Bradenton, Florida 34205
(941) 388-9400 x104
(941) 866-7648 Facsimile
Attorney For VOTT and Benderson
edvogler@voglerashton.com
-10-
Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 10 of 10
Preview
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWELFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, IN AND FOR SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA McCANN HOLDINGS, LTD., Plaintiff, CASE NO: 2011CA003897NC Vv. SDC COMMUNITIES, INC., VOTT-A, LLC, VOTT-B, LLC, VOTT-C, LLC, VOTT-D, LLC, HENRY RODRIGUEZ, and RANDALL BENDERSON Defendants. / ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendants, VOTT-A, LLC, VOTT-B, LLC, VOTT-C, LLC, and VOTT-D, LLC (collectively “VOTT”), and RANDALL BENDERSON (“Benderson’) by and through their undersigned attorneys, hereby file their Answer and Affirmative Defenses to the Third Amended Complaint and states as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 3. Admitted. 4. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 5. Admitted that Benderson resides in Sarasota County, Florida and acted on behalf of VOTT. Otherwise denied. 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted that this is an action for damages and other relief. Otherwise, Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 1 of 10without knowledge and therefore denied. 8. Admitted that the Laws of Florida, Chapter 2009-89 speak for themselves. 9, Without knowledge and therefore denied. 10. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 11. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 12. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 13. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 14. Admitted. 15. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 16. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 17. Admitted. 18. Admitted that Exhibit A speaks for itself. 19. Admitted that a meeting was held on or about June 23, 2010 and that Exhibit A speaks for itself. Otherwise, without knowledge and therefore denied. 20. Admitted that Exhibit A speaks for itself. Otherwise, without knowledge and therefore denied. 21. Denied that counsel for VOTT acted for third parties other than VOTT, and denied that the Agreement was the subject of communications to the BCC at the public hearing. Otherwise, without knowledge and therefore denied. 22. Admitted that an ORC Report was prepared by DCA. Otherwise, without knowledge and therefore denied. 23. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 24. Without knowledge and therefore denied. Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 2 of 1025. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 26. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 2/. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 28. Denied. 29. Denied. 30. Admitted that the BCC deferred adoption of the Amendment. Otherwise denied. 31. Denied. The Amendment has not been denied, or, alternatively, any denial is the fault of McCann. 32. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 33. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only. 34. VOTT and Benderson reallege and restate their answers to paragraphs 1 through 32 above as if fully restated herein. 35. Admitted that the Agreement is recorded in the public records. Otherwise, without knowledge and therefore denied. 36. Admitted. 3/7. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 38. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 39. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 40. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only. 41. VOTT realleges and restates its answers to paragraphs 1 through 32 above as if fully restated herein. 42. Admitted that the Agreement speaks for itself. Otherwise, without knowledge Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 3 of 10and therefore denied. 43. Denied. 44. __ Denied. 45. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only. 46. VOTT realleges and restates its answers to paragraphs 1 through 32 above as if fully restated herein. 47. Admitted that Exhibit A speaks for itself. Otherwise, without knowledge and therefore denied. 48. Admitted that Exhibit A speaks for itself. Otherwise, without knowledge and therefore denied. 49. Denied. 50. Denied. 51. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only. 52. Benderson realleges and restates its answers to paragraphs 1 through 31 above as if fully restated herein. 53. Admitted. 54. Denied. 55. Denied. 56. Denied. 5/7. Denied. 98. Denied. 59. Denied. 60. Denied. Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 4 of 1061. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only. 62. | Benderson realleges and restates its answers to paragraphs 1 through 32 and 53 through 59 above as if fully restated herein. 63. | Benderson was authorized to take the actions that he did on behalf of VOTT. Otherwise, without knowledge and therefore denied. 64. Denied. 65. Denied. 66. Denied. 67. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only. 68. VOTT realleges and restates its answers to paragraphs 1 through 31 above as if fully restated herein. 69. VOTT agreed to allow its real property to be located within the EEZ. Otherwise, without knowledge and therefore denied. 70. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 71. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 72. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 73. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 74. ~~ Denied. 75. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 76. Denied. 77. Denied. 78. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only. 79. Benderson realleges and restates its answers to paragraphs 1 through 31 Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 5 of 10above as if fully restated herein. 80. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 81. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 82. Admitted. 83. Denied. 84. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 85. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 86. Denied. 87. Denied. 88. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only. 89. Benderson realleges and restates its answers to paragraphs 1 through 31 above as if fully restated herein. 90. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 91. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 92. Denied. 93. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 94. Denied. 95. Denied. 96. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only. 97. VOTT and Benderson reallege and restate their answers to paragraphs 1 through 31 above as if fully restated herein. 98. Denied. 99. Benderson realleges and restates its answers to paragraphs 1 through 31 Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 6 of 10above as if fully restated herein. 100. Denied. 101. Admitted that Benderson and Rodriquez met alone on a Saturday. Otherwise without knowledge and therefore denied. 102. Without knowledge and therefore denied. 103. Admitted that the Agreement is valid and enforceable. Otherwise, without knowledge and therefore denied. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 104. McCann's claims in this matter are not ripe. The Amendment has not been denied, nor has it been terminated by operation of law. Therefore, no cause of action can arise at this time. 105. McCann waived its non-contractual claims in this matter by executing the Agreement, and McCann waived its claims by not performing its obligations thereunder, including the diligent pursuit of land use authorizations and entitlements as contemplated therein. 106. McCann failed to perform and committed the first material breach of the Agreement by not pursuing land use authorizations and entitlements in a manner that will effectuate the terms of the Agreement. Specifically, McCann did not effectively or in good faith pursue adoption of the Amendment, did not make material or substantive efforts to respond to third party concerns or comments, failed to pursue entitlements following the initial deferral by the BCC, and did not re-file or seek to rejuvenate the Amendment, or the scope of land use authorizations and entitlements sought thereunder (hereinafter “McCann's Failure To Act’). -_7- Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 7 of 10107. McCann has unclean hands and acted in bad faith by virtue of McCann's Failure To Act. 108. The express covenant(s) of the Agreement controls, and is inconsistent with the implied covenants alleged by McCann to have been breached. Therefore, no cause of action can arise at this time for breach of good faith and fair dealing. 109. McCann’s claims for breach of implied obligation of good faith and fair dealing are barred by the statute of frauds. 110. McCann's claims are barred by the Doctrine of Due Diligence by virtue of McCann's Failure To Act; and that McCann did not justifiably rely upon VOTT to obtain adoption of the Amendment. 111. The Agreement was partially performed in that Area 1 is now included within the EEZ as established by Sarasota County, Florida. 112. The Agreement is enforceable as a result of McCann's ratification of the Agreement as (i) Area 1 is included within the EEZ, and (ii) VOTT supported the Amendment. 113. By virtue of the Agreement, McCann's claims are barred by the Economic Loss Rule. Specifically (i) the fraud alleged by McCann is in the performance of the Agreement and not the inducement thereof, and (ii) individual liability of an entity agent or officer is inappropriate when the contract addresses a specific issue. 114. The actions by VOTT and Benderson are privileged, and McCann's claims are barred by the Business Judgment Rule as all actions taken by VOTT and Benderson were in the furtherance of the reasonable, justified, and recognized business interests of VOTT. Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 8 of 10115. Benderson is an improper party. Because VOTT has legitimate business interests to protect and Benderson is the agent for VOTT, Benderson has been improperly joined as an individual Defendant. The agent of an entity party acting within his capacity and scope is not considered a separate entity. 116. Asanagent of VOTT, a party to the Agreement, Benderson cannot interfere with the Agreement or an advantageous business relationship. Therefore, no cause of action can arise at this time. 117. The Agreement is a settlement agreement of disputed claims and the actions of VOTT and Benderson in connection therewith are privileged. 118. The actions of VOTT and Benderson are not the proximate cause of McCann's claim of damages. 119. McCann failed to mitigate its damages, including by virtue of McCann's Failure To Act. 120. McCann’s damages were caused in whole or in part by McCann’s own negligence or the failure to exercise ordinary care, the actions of other individuals or entities over whom VOTT and Benderson had no control, or as a result of McCann’s Failure To Act. 121. McCann’s damages were the result of intervening or superseding events, factors, occurrences, or conditions, which were in no way cause by or contributed by VOTT or Benderson. 122. McCann is estopped from asserting its claims by virtue of McCann’s Failure To Act, and any and all such other actions taken in detriment to the Agreement. 123. The existence of a public private partnership in connection with the approval Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 9 of 10of a legislative act ts illegal and barred as a matter of law. 124. For matters not related to the Agreement or the performance thereunder, VOTT and Benderson’s actions are protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. /s/ Edward Vogler Il EDWARD VOGLER II Vogler Ashton, PLLC 2411-A Manatee Avenue West Bradenton, FL 34205 Email: edvogler@voglerashton.com (941) 388-9400 x104 (941) 866-7648 Fax Florida Bar No. 0380970 Attorneys for VOTT and Benderson edvogler@voglerashton.com CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished this 8th day of July, 2013, by Electronic Mail to: Steven D. Hutton, Esq., 240 S. Pineapple Avenue, Suite 801, Sarasota, Florida 34236 sdh@huttonlawfirm.com; pdominko@huttonlawfirm.com, and noreen@huttonlawfirm.com, and Morgan R. Bentley, Esq. 783 S. Orange Avenue, Suite 220, Sarasota, Florida 34236 mbentley@bentleyandbruning.com, nwhite@bentleyandbruning.com, and handrews@bentleyandbruning.com. ___/s/ Edward Vogler II EDWARD VOGLER II, ESQUIRE Florida Bar No. 0380970 Vogler Ashton, PLLC 2411 — A Manatee Avenue West Bradenton, Florida 34205 (941) 388-9400 x104 (941) 866-7648 Facsimile Attorney For VOTT and Benderson edvogler@voglerashton.com -10- Filed for Record 07/09/2013 09:00 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court - Sarasota County, FL - 2011 CA 003897 NC Dkt-6947924 Page 10 of 10