arrow left
arrow right
  • MCCONNELL, MADELINE vs. P.D.K, INC. BUSINESS TORTS document preview
  • MCCONNELL, MADELINE vs. P.D.K, INC. BUSINESS TORTS document preview
  • MCCONNELL, MADELINE vs. P.D.K, INC. BUSINESS TORTS document preview
  • MCCONNELL, MADELINE vs. P.D.K, INC. BUSINESS TORTS document preview
  • MCCONNELL, MADELINE vs. P.D.K, INC. BUSINESS TORTS document preview
  • MCCONNELL, MADELINE vs. P.D.K, INC. BUSINESS TORTS document preview
  • MCCONNELL, MADELINE vs. P.D.K, INC. BUSINESS TORTS document preview
  • MCCONNELL, MADELINE vs. P.D.K, INC. BUSINESS TORTS document preview
						
                                

Preview

Filing # 102973277 E-Filed 02/07/2020 06:09:54 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINETEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA MADELINE and WILLIAM MCCONNELL, Plaintiffs, Case No. 562017CA1650AXXXHC Vv. P.D.K, INC., A Florida Corporation, Defendant. oo AFFIDAVIT OF EMILY KOMLOSSY IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ RENEWED SUPPLEMENTAL AND AMENDED MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND EXPENSES, INCLUDING APPELLATE FEES STATE OF FLORIDA ) ) ss.t COUNTY OF BROWARD _ ) I, EMILY KOMLOSSY, being duly sworn, state as follows: 1. Tam counsel for the Plaintiffs in the above-captioned action and a shareholder of Komlossy Law, P.A. I submit this affidavit in support of Plaintiffs’ Renewed Supplemental and Amended Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses, Including Appellate Fees. This affidavit is based on my own personal knowledge and/or the records or the records of the firms regarding the matters stated herein and, if called upon, I could and would competently testify thereto. 2. Attached hereto as Ex. A is a true and correct copy of the Order dated January 8, 2020from the 4th DCA regarding Plaintiffs’ fee motion. 3. Attached hereto as Ex. B is a true and correct copy of Florida statutes governing the inspection of books and records at or about the time this action commenced.4. Attached hereto as Ex. C is a chart of time spent by counsel in prosecuting this litigation in order for the McConnells to enforce their right under Florida’s books and records statutes, which was prepared from time records maintained by counsel in the ordinary course of business. 5. Attached hereto as Ex. D are true and correct copies of Order approving counsel’s fee in contingent shareholder matters involving breach of fiduciary duty. 6. Attached hereto as Ex. E is a true and correct copy of an article summarizing a survey conducted by the Florida Bar authored by Mark D. Killian, “Bar Survey Looks at Law Firm Economics”, Florida Bar News (Mar. 12, 2019). 7. Attached hereto as Ex. F is a copy of counsel’s firm resume. 8. Attached here as Ex. G are true and correct copies of the dockets in this case, and that of the appeal to the 4th DCA. 9. Attached hereto as Ex. H is a list of expenses incurred in the prosecution of this action. 10. Attached hereto as Ex. I is a form of proposed order granting the relief sought by Plaintiffs. 11. ama member in good standing of the Florida Bar since 1994, and a member in good standing of the New York Bar since 1990. I am admitted to the Southern and Northern Districts of New York, the Western District of Michigan and the Southern and Middle Districts of Florida. 12. 1 have spent the majority of my legal career prosecuting cases on behalf of shareholders against publicly-traded corporations, which types of cases include breach of fiduciary duty claims in connection with mergers, derivative cases on behalf of corporations and federal securities cases in jurisdictions throughout the United States and books and records requests. Those cases were handled on a contingent basis. Since I started my own practice in 2013, I continue to handle those types of cases, and am currently engaged in a derivative action in Puerto Rico and a class claim in Minnesota.13. [have prosecuted several cases in Florida principally involving claims of breach of fiduciary duty in connection with corporate mergers and buyouts of public companies. See, Ex. D hereto. 14. Lam prosecuting this case based on an hourly rate of only $200.00. As is my practice, I keep time records of my hours spent on cases and have summarized them for this case in Ex. C. Not all of the time spent by me in this case is reflected in Ex. C. In looking through my emails and records, I did not include all of the many communications I had with opposing counsel or my clients. I also did not include the time spent in 2019 which related to tasks performed leading to the McConnells’ participation in PDK’s first annual shareholder meeting (such as edits to Notice of Meeting and Proxy, as well as attendance at such meeting) as I did not view this time as “incurred in order to obtain the order” for the shareholders to “enforce their rights” to inspect documents. However, I did include time researching and drafting a motion to compel an annual shareholder meeting and opposing the entry of the Final Judgment, as the lack of a shareholder meeting was one of the several factors that formed the basis of my opposition. 15. Nor have I included time spent preparing the December 2018 fee motion or this motion. However, I do reserve the right to seek “fees on fees” as this statute has relatively little interpretation in Florida and was intended to protect the rights of shareholders. Accordingly, I believe the time reflected in Ex. C is also conservative and not fully reflective of the actual time I spent on the case. A fuller summary of what transpired during this litigation is contained at pages 7-12 of the motion submitted herewith, as well as the dockets at Ex. G hereto. 16. | am familiar with the hourly rates charged by and awarded to attorneys in South Florida, as well as the lawyers in my field who practice in other jurisdictions but command much higher hourly rates. I believe that $200.00 per hour is conservative for a lawyer of my years out and experience in shareholder litigation and is eminently reasonable. 17. I also believe that the time reflected in Ex. C is reasonable based upon the two and one-half years this case has been litigated, and the positions taken by PDK. 18. Finally, I believe that the expenses in Ex. H are also conservative, and were 3expenses necessary for the successful prosecution of this case. hike “ahr EMILY KOMLOSSY STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF BROWARD Sworn to (or affirmed) and subscribed before me this 7 day of February, 2020, by EMILY KOMLOSSY, who is personally known to me or produced information in the form of a driver’s license. WN bl, Brian raustela SE commission # F973 res: Aptil 7, a Bonded thru Aaron Notary ‘y Public