Welcome
This is the home page for the law office of John M. Eagleton, a Tulsa Attorney and Counselor at Law. Contact Mr. Eagleton at 918-584-2002.
Mr. Eagleton served as a Tulsa City Councilor for District 7 from April 2006 to December 2011. Visit the Tulsa City Council District Finder for the name and contact information for your current city councilor.
Quotable
"If we raise taxes we will drive business and industry away from Tulsa."
-- Councilor John Eagleton, January 26, 2010
"It is impossible to introduce into society a greater change and a greater evil than this: the conversion of law into an instrument of plunder."
| Why Tulsa needs an elected city attorney |
| Tuesday, 04 January 2011 22:59 |
|
From: Rees, Drew David: This morning I found a copy of the attached documents on my desk. Since you are the Interim City Attorney, I presume Mr. Wohlgemuth provided you copies as well. During our telephone conversation last week, you indicated it was your belief that the City of Tulsa should provide the Councilors with representation on this matter, but you were conflicted out due to your previous opinion. As you are aware, the Council has set a Special Meeting for tomorrow afternoon at 2:00pm to address that very issue. The problem is that the expedited hearing is set for 10:00am tomorrow morning. Since all Councilors were only named in their official capacity, are you planning on providing representation for the City or the Councilors at hearing? If not, what advice do you want to provide them on the matter? I appreciate your help on this matter. Drew From: Pauling, David For the record and in memorandum of our conversation this am, you are authorized on my behalf to attend the 10 am TRO hearing. You are not authorized to enter any appearance on the City's behalf. Advise the judge that o/s counsel is being arranged at a special meeting of the council at 2 pm, the very first opportunity when such a meeting could be arranged. From: Rees, Drew To be clear, I am only authorized to inform the Court that the City Council has called a Special Meeting to hire counsel for 2pm tomorrow. Am I allowed to request a continuance until Friday or Monday? I believe you also said I could appoint another attorney (at no expense to the City) to do the same. Is that correct? And is it also your understanding that since I or my designee are not authorized to enter an appearance on behalf of the City of Tulsa to represent the Councilors, that they will be without representation for the hearing?
From: Pauling, David You are an assistant City Attorney who was given an assignment. You do not have authority to appoint a designee of you choice to perform in court. Frankly, the Council does not a have a real live dog in this fight. What they have done is done and requires no live testimony on a TRO. The real concern is regards to the election board and how soon they start their meter on election costs. This is why I say do not hide behind service technicalities which can be overcome at the expense of time. Time is the enemy. Bullying this issue has exposed the City to a potential $100,000 bill from the election boards (plus o/s legal expenses ) which if if not resolved before the 3 election boards fully ramp up for the Noticed election, could be owed for an election which the Court stops with a permanent injunction. I am sorry, but I am compelled to say that you totally failed to advise the non-existent legal entity you continue to believe is your client about the current course of events which were totally forseeable at the time I objected and stated my reasons to the Council. They wouldn't/couldn't trust me, but you were wearing a totally different pair of shoes and your silence was not helpful.
From: Rees, Drew David: I must address several inconsistencies and misstatements in your email below. In our discussion today, when I questioned your decision not to provide the City nor any Councilor any representation at tomorrow’s hearing, you quipped “You can just go over to court if you want”. In response to your statement, I told you I needed authorization in writing and the ability to designate someone else to attend in my stead. You agreed I could authorize someone else, stating only “you realize it must be pro bono since there is no contract.” I sent an email at 2:22pm this afternoon, again seeking clarification of my authorization. You did not send your response until 6:55pm, over 4 ½ hours later, (and after the work day was clearly over), on a particularly time sensitive issue. In our meeting, you agreed that since the Councilors were only sued in their official capacity, the City is the real party at interest here, not the individual Councilors. Yet, all you have done is “authorize” me to tell the Court that the Council is having a Special Meeting at 2:00pm tomorrow to appoint legal counsel. Further, you advised a City Councilor to give up a valid legal defense for the City. Such conduct is hard to explain, especially when you have supposedly recused yourself from the lawsuit. You were aware of this hearing last week, and still have taken no measures to provide the City a defense in this matter. Your delay has placed the City in an untenable position. I cannot imagine how you can justify your actions in this matter. And now, you want someone else to face the Court’s wrath for your inaction. You have taken no steps to protect your client’s interests, and since you are specifically not authorizing me to provide legal representation to the City or the Councilors, but only to deliver your message, I suggest you have your secretary do it. I also ask that you do not presume to know my mind. When you said “the non-existent legal entity you continue to believe is your client,” you knew what you were saying was not factually true. We have discussed several times the relationship of the City Attorney’s Office, the Council Attorney, the Mayor, the Council, and the City as a whole. I have always said that my client is the City as a whole, although my current job is to advise the Council. Just as I have said the City Attorney is supposed to represent all elected officials, equally and without bias, and represent the corporate entity, the City of Tulsa, Oklahoma, as our client. We provide the legal advice and let the elected officials make the policy decisions. I cannot fathom why you would knowingly place such falsehoods about me in writing. It is truly disappointing and I demand you stop immediately. I also demand you cease your unjustified attacks on me and my legal representation. In the instance you cite below, you do not know what advice I had given, nor to whom. And even if Councilors needed to be reminded of the potential costs associated with defending a lawsuit, need I remind you that you would be more guilty than I. You did not effectively provide your written opinion until the morning of the vote. You had opportunity to address those issues in your written memo, but you did not. You were at the meeting, heard the discussion, and you spoke, yet you chose not to inform them of the very thing you accuse me of. You had days to reflect on the ramifications of your opinion, and twice you affirmatively chose not to provide the Councilors such information. Either you did not deem it necessary or you affirmatively failed to advise your client for the benefit of the Mayor. Please, let me know which one you think it was. Your continued failure to provide fair and unbiased advise to the Mayor and the Council and serve the City as a whole, discredits you, your office, and your predecessors. It saddens me to say it also vindicates Mayor Savage’s actions when you were forced to resign before. Finally, we used to be friends and co-workers. I hope we can end this ugly situation, put it behind us, and work on a respectful and professional basis. Sincerely,
|