⚖️ Legal Update XIV: It’s Show Time!

: If this message does not format correctly, you can view it on our web site here.

⚖️ Legal Update XIV: It’s Show Time!
January 10, 2021

In our last “Legal Update” on January 5, 2021, we reported on the latest developments of the two remaining active lawsuits involving the Club. There have been a number of filings posted to both case dockets in just this short amount of time, and both cases have hearings in the next two days. We have summarized the latest developments in each case below, but we hope that all current and former Club members will take the time to inform themselves before the two public hearings, which are open to the public and available via Zoom.

Borers vs. Pompano Senior Squadron Flying Club, Inc.

Back on December 4, 2020, the Club’s attorney filed a “Notice of Non-Jury Trial - 2 Hours/Evidentiary Hearing” that apparently scheduled a trial for tomorrow, Monday, January 11, 2021 at 10:00am. Even though the Broward County Court web site still does not reflect this hearing event on the public docket, it appears that all parties are proceeding as if it will happen. Again, this is a public hearing at which any member of the public, regardless of your Club membership status, may log into Zoom to watch.

On January 6, 2021, the day after our last newsletter, the Court posted two notices that were supposedly filed by the Borers (“Notice of Dropping Party” in which the Borers supposedly dropped Gregory Gilhooly as a Defendant, and “Plaintiff’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal” in which Michael Borer supposedly dismissed all his claims against the Defendants) in spite of the fact the Borers’ had already filed a motion to effect the same back on December 7, 2020. It is also conspicuous that both documents were (inexplicably) timestamped as having being filed a week earlier, on December 30, 2020 at 1:05:55 PM, and yet no explanation is given as to where these filings had been hiding.

But the most suspicious aspect of these notices is that they were supposedly filed by the Borers. The problem is that the format (page layout, font, etc.) and filing method is entirely different from previous filings by the Borers. These new notices were electronically filed and are formatted just like all filings from the Club’s attorney, Edward Holodak. The Borers have never electronically filed anything. Instead, they have consistently hand-delivered their filings to the Clerk, such as their most recent actual filing, their “Disclosure of Plaintiffs Evidence and Witness List,” which was hand-delivered and bears a filing time stamp of December 30, 2010 at 12:40:00 PM. However, both of the new filings were electronically filed and bear a filing time stamp of December 30, 2010 at 1:05:55 PM, less than 26 minutes after the Borers hand-filed their disclosure.

Thus, it appears that the Borers did not file these notices at all. It would seem that the Club’s lawyer, Edward Holodak, electronically filed these two notices and affixed the Borer’s signatures, all without any citation granting him authority to file anything on behalf of the Borers. Further, the nature of these filings by Mr. Holodak after January 6, 2021, when these two documents appeared, gives an appearance that Mr. Holodak contacted the Judge’s Judicial Assistant to get them added because the Club needed them in the record to lay the foundation for the next planned filings from the Club, all of which is being done after the filing deadline of January 4, 2021 set by Mr. Holodak. This is all just more evidence of bizarre legal conduct by Edward Holodak. It implies Mr. Holodak has taken over all aspects of the case, representing the Defendant Club, scheduling the trial and its rules (like the Court should have), and now filing documents purporting to bear the signatures of the Plaintiffs. Mr. Holodak has clearly emerged as the “tail wagging the dog,” something the Borers should be very wary about.

In addition to filing these notices on behalf of the Borers, Mr. Holodak also made two other filings on Thursday, January 7, 2021, and then yet another last-minute filing on Friday, January 8, 2021, all of which are stated to have been only mailed to the Borers via U.S. Mail, which means they will likely not be delivered before trial tomorrow morning:

“Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Request for Production”: At first blush, this document seemed like it might reflect the Club answering the request for documents that the Borers had requested on December 23, 2020 to be produced at trial, but closer examination indicates material differences. In short, it appears that the Borers have been in communication with Mr. Holodak, and that Mr. Holodak has construed the Borers have requested the Club produce documents other than those the Borers requested on December 23, 2020. Further, it is unclear what, if any, responsive documents were ever provided to the Borers.
“[Defendant’s] Request [to Plaintiff Borer] to Produce”: In this document, the Club makes a “legalese” request to the Borers that is more than a little strange because they are asking for five categories of documents, including three that the Borers have already identified as exhibits, including (1) application for membership, (2) checks the Borer’s sent to the Club, and (3) all invoices from the Club to the Borers. The two “new” requests appear to indicate an invasive and overly broad fishing expedition intended to harass and discourage the Borers. The Club wants copies of all communications – EVER – between (to or from) the Borers and anyone involved in the club from 2018 until today. The Club is also demanding the Borers produce communications to the Club showing when they had previously asked the Club for financial records, minutes, and other Club documents.
“[Defendant’s] Trial Memorandum”: In this document, the Club makes an unrestrained attack upon former member Steven Borer, a young man who the Club’s attorney has methodically ensured is “cut from the herd” so that he is isolated and vulnerable to abusive legal attack that will overwhelm and tear him apart. In this Memorandum, the Club makes all manner of claims including:
- The Club is a for-profit corporation (in spite of the fact the Club has filed as – and been recognized by the IRS as – a not-for-profit 501(c)(7) organization since at least 1974).
- Refusing to admit that Steven Borer was ever a Club member.
- Claiming that the Borer’s complaint failed to comply with Rule 1.130 of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure (while ignoring the fact that Rule 1.130 is not applicable in Small Claims Court because it is not one of the eight rules from Florida Rules of Civil Procedure that are exclusively and specifically incorporated by reference in Rule 7.020 of the Florida Small Claims Rules, and that other rules from Florida Rules of Civil Procedure may only be invoked by judicial ruling.)
- Now that Michael Borer is severed from the case, the Club immediately pivoted to claim that any checks or payments that Michael Borer made to the Club on his son’s account are not admissible because he is not a party. Besides the circular “logic” of this disingenuous claim, the Club also wrongly relies upon Rule 1.210 of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, a rule that has not been approved by the Judge in this case (the Florida Small Claims Rules do incorporate Rule 1.210(b), but that is not applicable because it only applies to minors or “incompetent persons.”).
- The balance of the Club’s Trial Memorandum is a bunch of legalese and case citation that we believe has no place in Small Claims Court.

To the extent that the Judge allows the Club to succeed in abusing the Small Claims Court process like they have been, we have serious doubts as to the Borer’s ability to voice and succeed with any objections, or even succeed in the case.

These documents reflect the Club’s ongoing strategy is to deflect attention from basic facts and fundamental fairness in order to achieve victory not on the merits, but instead on unethical and false-premise “technicalities.” This strategy is obviously being pursued with the full support of the Club’s Board, Gregory Gilhooly, Tor Holm, Andrew Bilukha, Gregg Galyo, and Gregory Worley. If these individuals were actually engaged in honorable service to the Club, why are they running scared? Why is there no mention in Club minutes of their legal gambits? When they launched their campaign for re-election, why did they conceal their support for bombastic legal attacks against current and former Club members? The reason should be obvious: They know what they are doing is bad and wrong, and would be politically damaging, so they are too ashamed to talk about it. They know talking about it would undermine the rosy (but false and empty) picture of competency they are trying to portray. In short, they hope all of this unethical behavior will remain their dirty little secret for just another month so that they can be re-elected using their own lies, omissions, and deceit onto the membership.

During the hearing, the Club apparently plans to make an oral argument amounting to:

“Sorry folks, you waited too long. Rather than recognize you for being a good Samaritan by allowing the Club some time to get through some rough financial spots, we think you should have made more demands and threats against the Club before suing. But that doesn't matter because we recently made an unprecedented and egregious interpretation of one clause in one of our governing documents – a clause never before construed in this manner in the Club’s lengthy history – an interpretation that we are using to erase our obligation of refunding our membership fee debt. This interpretation is so extreme that it necessitates a high-priced legal mouthpiece because it is so flawed. Sure, the membership fee was prominently advertised as fully refundable, and we know that the Club has always refunded them, but we aren’t going to refund any owed membership fees anymore, and we just don’t care if you don’t like it. You’re not even a member! If you don’t like our immoral and unethical conduct, you’ll get to meet our new attorney. The membership is spending tens of thousands of dollars on this attorney so we can benefit from what we defrauded from you. That’s right, your loss goes right into the Club coffers for us to benefit from (tax free, because we’re not-for-profit when it suits us, and claim to be for-profit whenever we feel like it). And if we ever decide our cumulation of bad decisions and legal costs have forced us into bankruptcy, we’ll get the judge to allow us to liquidate and split your membership fee among ourselves. Thanks for that nice dinner, sucker!”

Again, the open question is if the Judge is going to tolerate that kind of ridiculous, offensive, and contemptable argument (even if they try to conceal their contempt for members by toning it down a bit), or if the Judge will not delay justice any further than it already has been delayed by ruling in favor of the Borers’ simple argument of relevant facts, the way “the People’s Court” is supposed to function (without lawyers gumming up the works!).

Based on what has been publicly filed to date, we have updated our page containing exhibits of the images along with a single PDF file so you can review it all in advance to best be able to understand what is happening and what is being said.

To witness the Club lawyer’s oral arguments to obstruct justice being sought by individuals whose only crime was being a member-in-good-standing who tendered their fully-refundable membership fee and timely paid their dues and flying bills, and then waited patiently for their refund so as to not harm the Club as it endured some transient hard times, just tune in tomorrow at 10:00 am by Zoom! This is a public hearing, and no matter who you are, you are welcome to observe. After all, you could be next on the Club’s hit list.

Quick Links

Pompano Senior Squadron Flying Club, Inc. vs. Carl L. Kennedy, II

It is not going to be a trial, but the day after the Borers’ trial there is a public hearing in this case to consider three of Mr. Kennedy’s outstanding motions:

Motion for Contempt (filed 12/11/2020)
Motion to Compel Better Responses (filed 10/12/2020)
Second Motion for Default Due to Plaintiff’s Failure to Respond to Amended Counter-Complaint (filed 12/31/2020)

It seems that Mr. Kennedy may have gotten the attention of the Club with the most recent of these, but only to the extent that, just like they have done before in this case and are now doing in the Borer case, the Club’s lawyer commences with technical arguments slipped in at the last minute (or even altogether untimely) in filings that are transparent attempts to frustrate judicial efficiency.

Also, the day after this Motions Hearing, on Wednesday, January 13, 2021, the Club’s attorney intends to depose Mr. Kennedy’s lawyer friend, Ms. Wendy Hausmann. This deposition is not open to the public, but it still may be the subject of discussion on Tuesday’s hearing.

To witness the Club’s lawyer engage in awe-inspiring legal gymnastics, just tune in Tuesday, January 12, 2021 at 8:30 am by Zoom! This is a public hearing, and no matter who you are, you are welcome to observe.

Quick Links

We will continue to update the litigation pages on this web site as we learn more, but please continue to let us hear from you at newsletter-feedback@pompanobeachflyingclub.info. Below are some quick links to the main areas of our web site.

This email was sent to , {email}, because you are or have been affiliated with the Pompano Beach Flying Club. If you want to be removed from updates about this new web site, click here. To edit your subscription information click here.