Ballot argument falls short

I feel compelled to respond to the stunning misrepresentations in recent letters to The Acorn by Mr. Gambardella, Ms. Hubbard and the Las Virgenes Homeowners Federation about the Malibu Valley Inn and Spa ballot argument lawsuit they just lost.

Judge Dzintra Janavs just signed a judgment in favor of Brian Boudreau and against Gambardella’s client, Mary Hubbard. Judge Janavs did not validate Ms. Hubbard’s argument. She found most of the argument against the inn and spa was opinion that Hubbard could express with little or no factual basis.

Judge Janavs found that Hubbard asserted false and misleading facts in two places and she revised the argument to rephrase those statements as Hubbard’s unfounded opinion.

Furthermore, the judge found the Federation claim that its 22 member associations opposed the project is false and misleading. Her decision was not based on a hypertechnicality. The vote occurred at a Federation board meeting that didn’t have a quorum, let alone 22 member associations present.

The second vote was an email ballot that violated Federation bylaws, was not sent to all the board members and misrepresented the facts. Less than half of the recipients responded and Federation President Steve Hess reported the vote without disclosing that the count included at least one person who wasn’t even a board member.

Not only did they lose, but the judge told them they lost. When Gambardella asked the Court to hear a motion for his fees, the Judge responded, “I’m not going o do that. I don’t see any basis for that whatsoever since they prevailed.” When Gambardella responded that the court made only minor changes to the anti-development argument, the judge retorted, “Very important changes.”

After all that, the Federation, Ms. Hubbard and Mr. Gambardella claim they won?

Not true. Stanley W. Lamport Legal Counsel to Brian Boudreau Los Angeles