IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

CASE NO. 09-14183

KLAUS HOFMANN, Appellee/Plaintiff, vs. EMI RESORTS, INC., et al., Appellants/Defendants. ____________________________________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida Case Nos. 09-20526, 09-20657 BRIEF BY APPELLANTS EMI RESORTS, INC. et al. 1

James Moon, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 938211 Peter D. Russin, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 765902 MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 Wachovia Financial Center 200 South Biscayne Boulevard Miami, Florida 33131 Telephone: (305) 358-6363 Telecopy: (305) 358-1221 Counsel for EMI Resorts, Inc. et al.
1 EMI Resorts Inc., EMI Sun Village Inc., HSV Operadora de Hoteles, S.A., EMI Resorts Management, S.A., EMI Resorts (S.V.G.) Inc., EMI Cofresi Developments Inc., Sun Village Juan Dolio Inc., Promotora Xara, S.A., Elliott Miches Holdings Inc., Inversiones Yubaso, S.A., Inmobiliaria Lirios Del Tropico, S.A., Inmobiliaria Canadaigua, S.A., HSV Holdings, S.A., Desarrollos Mirador Cofresi, S.A., Tenedora HSV [B.P.], S.A., Villa Santa Ponca, S.A., Bertus Management Inc., CCW Dominicana, S.A, Cofresco Holdings Inc., Inmobiliaria Moncey, S.A., Cellwave Networks Limited and WWIN International Limited (collectively, "EMI Appellants" or "EMI Corporate Defendants").

LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS Pursuant to Rule 26.1 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and Rule 26.11 of the Eleventh Circuit Rules, the following is a list of the trial judge(s), all attorneys, persons, associations of persons, firms, partnerships or corporations with any known interest in the outcome of this appeal: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 408 Cumberland Holdings, Inc., Defendant Aguilar, Aurelio, Former Plaintiff Aguilar, Jose Manuel Leyua, Former Plaintiff Aguilar, Leyva, Plaintiff-Intervenor Aguilar, Martha, Plaintiff Aguilar, Rafael, Plaintiff-Intervenor Aguilar, Salvador, Plaintiff Alcarez, Bernave, Plaintiff-Intervenor Aldrich, Greg, Former Plaintiff Aldrich, Wendy, Former Plaintiff Alejandro, Jorge, Plaintiff-Intervenor Alexa, John, Plaintiff-Intervenor Allred, Elsa, Plaintiff- Intervenor Altamirano, Cesar, Plaintiff Altamirano, Sabino, Former Plaintiff
Page 1 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. Amezcua, Rosa, Plaintiff-Intervenor Andebrhan, Tigist, Plaintiff-Intervenor Andersen, Barry, Plaintiff-Intervenor Andersen, Irma, Plaintiff-Intervenor Anderson, Frederick, Plaintiff-Intervenor Anderson, Sheri, Plaintiff-Intervenor Anderson, Steve, Plaintiff-Intervenor Anderson, Roy, Former Plaintiff Andrade, Luis, Plaintiff-Intervenor Andrade, Teresa, Plaintiff-Intervenor Aniciete, Sherwin, Plaintiff Antrim, Joanne, Plaintiff- Intervenor Anzures, Ema, Former Plaintiff Anzures, Juan, Former Plaintiff Arango, Alejandra, Former Plaintiff Arango-Carreno, Angeles, Plaintiff Arnold, Janae, Plaintiff-Intervenor Arnstein & Lehr LLP, Counsel to Plaintiffs, Case No. 09-20526 Arredondo, Juan, Plaintiff-Intervenor Atwood, Ardith, Plaintiff- Intervenor
Page 2 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. Atwood, Garth, Plaintiff-Intervenor Avalos, Enrique, Former Plaintiff Avalos, Gildardo, Former Plaintiff Avalos, Olivia, Former Plaintiff Avenetti, Diane, Plaintiff-Intervenor Avilla, Kathy, Plaintiff Baeyena, Michael, Plaintiff-Intervenor Baker, Laura, Plaintiff-Intervenor Ballesteros, Gloria, Former Plaintiff Banda, Juan, Former Plaintiff Barber, Susan, Former Proposed Plaintiff-Intervenor Barber Family Trust, Former Proposed Plaintiff-Intervenor Barnes, Pamela, Former Plaintiff Barnett, Annette, Plaintiff-Intervenor Barragan, Alex, Former Plaintiff Barretto, Don, Former Plaintiff Barretto, Francis, Former Plaintiff Bartlett, Linda, Plaintiff Bates, Christy, Former Plaintiff Bates, Georgia, Plaintiff-Intervenor
Page 3 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. Bates, Robert, Plaintiff-Intervenor Beal, Jesse, Plaintiff-Intervenor Beckstead, Jared, Former Plaintiff Bell, Kevin, Plaintiff-Intervenor Bel1ido, Nelson, Counsel to the Elliott Defendants Belvis, Lulu, Plaintiff-Intervenor Bertus Management, Inc., Defendant Benedict, Katherine, Plaintiff-Intervenor Benedict, Thomas, Plaintiff Biddulph, Gregory, Plaintiff-Intervenor Biddulph, Luana, Former Plaintiff Biddulph, Stephen, Plaintiff-Intervenor Biggs, Loran, Plaintiff Biggs, Winifred, Plaintiff Bingham, Gary, Former Plaintiff Bingham, Judith, Former Plaintiff Bischoff, Vicky, Former Plaintiff Bisel Family Trust, Former Plaintiff Bisel, Trudy, Former Plaintiff Blackman, Rod, Former Plaintiff
Page 4 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. Blackman, Rosemary, Former Plaintiff Boehm, Eric, Former Plaintiff Boehm, Deborah, Former Plaintiff Bonite, Jean, Plaintiff Bonite, Rodger, Plaintiff Boutin, Gary, Plaintiff Boyce, William III, Plaintiff Brahms, Sharon, Plaintiff Braithwaite, Randy, Plaintiff Braithwaite, Ronda, Plaintiff Brandt, Alvin, Plaintiff-Intervenor Brandt, Irene, Plaintiff-Intervenor Braun, Hans, Former Plaintiff Bran, Ulrike, Former Plaintiff Brewster, Elaine, Plaintiff-Intervenor Briggs, Norman, Former Plaintiff Brimhall, Timo, Former Plaintiff Brimley, David, Former Plaintiff Brimley, Richard, Former Plaintiff Brinkman, Mark, Plaintiff-Intervenor
Page 5 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 96. 97. 98. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. 108. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. 114. 115. Brinkman, Roberta, Former Plaintiff Brit, Mary, Former Plaintiff Brogan, Lynn, Plaintiff-Intervenor Brondum, Aaron, Former Plaintiff Brondum, Carol, Plaintiff-Intervenor Brondum, Harold, Plaintiff-Intervenor Brookman, John, Plaintiff-Intervenor Broughton, Francine, Plaintiff Browning, James, Former Plaintiff Browning, Janet, Former Plaintiff Bugarin, Martin, Plaintiff- Intervenor Bunatao, Dorianne, Former Plaintiff Bunatao, Ioobi, Former Plaintiff Bundy, Steven, Plaintiff-Intervenor Burica, Alan, Plaintiff Burr, Scott, Counsel to Elliott Defendants Bustos, Luis, Plaintiff-Intervenor Byington, Eveline, Former Plaintiff CCW Dominicana, S.A., Defendant Caballero Lara, Genoveva, Former Plaintiff
Page 6 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 116. 117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. 123. 124. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133. 134. 135. Cabezud, Janet, Plaintiff Cabezud, Josiah, Former Plaintiff Cabezud, Steven, Plaintiff Cabral, Victor, Defendant Cagle, Steven, Plaintiff Calderon, Manuel, Plaintiff-Intervenor Caldwell, Diane, Former Plaintiff Caldwell, Jon, Former Plaintiff Call, Spencer, Plaintiff-Intervenor Callahan, Michael, Plaintiff-Intervenor Calloway, Jane, Plaintiff-Intervenor Calloway, Philip, Plaintiff-Intervenor Cameron, Valerie, Former Plaintiff Carmona, Francisco, Plaintiff-Intervenor Carmona, Ricardo, Former Plaintiff Carreno, Antonio, Plaintiff-Intervenor Carreno, Febronia, Plaintiff-Intervenor Carrillo, Juan, Plaintiff-Intervenor Carrillo, Maria, Plaintiff-Intervenor Casarez, Tonya, Former Plaintiff
Page 7 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 136. 137. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142. 143. 144. 145. 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. 151. 152. 153. 154. 155. Casassa, Gary, Plaintiff-Intervenor Casey, Gayline, Former Plaintiff Casillas, Baudelia, Plaintiff-Intervenor Castellanos, Sabas, Former Plaintiff Castenada, Andrew, Plaintiff-Intervenor Castenada, Leticia, Plaintiff-Intervenor Castillo, Erica, Former Plaintiff Castillo, Rodolfo, Former Plaintiff Catledge, James, Plaintiff Catledge, Janie, Plaintiff-Intervenor CCW Dominicana, S.A., Defendant Cellwave Networks Limited, Defendant Cendeja, Irma, Plaintiff-Intervenor Cendejas, Jose, Plaintiff-Intervenor Centeno, Marcelino, Former Plaintiff Centeno, Maria, Plaintiff-Intervenor Centeno, Ofelia, Former Plaintiff Centeno, Victor, Plaintiff-Intervenor Chase, Daphne, Former Plaintiff Chavez, Israel, Former Plaintiff
Page 8 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 156. 157. 158. 159. 160. 161. 162. 163. 164. 165. 166. 167. 168. 169. 170. 171. 172. 173. 174. 175. Chavez, Victor, Plaintiff Christensen, Kathie, Plaintiff-Intervenor Christensen, Kerry, Plaintiff-Intervenor Christensen, Michelle, Plaintiff Christensen, Paul, Plaintiff Clawson, Robb, Former Plaintiff Clendenning, Christene, Plaintiff Clendenning, Christopher, Plaintiff Cofresco Holdings, Inc., Defendant Cofresi Developments, Inc., Defendant Cole Scott & Kissane, Counsel to Special Master Combs, Cheryl, Plaintiff-Intervenor Combs, Ray, Plaintiff-Intervenor Comsa, Mark, Former Plaintiff Cole, Angela, Plaintiff Cole, Antwon, Plaintiff Concepcion, Carlos, Counsel to the Elliott Defendants Concepcion, Sexton & Martinez, Counsel to the Elliott Defendants Connor, Maria, Plaintiff-Intervenor Connor, Michael, Plaintiff-Intervenor
Page 9 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 176. 177. 178. 179. 180. 181. 182. 183. 184. 185. 186. 187. 188. 189. 190. 191. 192. 193. 194. 195. Cook, P. Stavan, Former Plaintiff Correa, Juan, Former Plaintiff Cortez, Amalia, Former Plaintiff Cortez, Elsy, Former Plaintiff Cossey, Darren, Plaintiff-Intervenor Cossey, Debra, Plaintiff-Intervenor Cossey, Jennifer, Plaintiff-Intervenor Cossey, John, Plaintiff-Intervenor Courgi, Doris, Plaintiff-Intervenor Courgi, Karim, Plaintiff-Intervenor Cox, Kathy, Plaintiff-Intervenor Craner, Mark, Former Plaintiff Craner, Melisa, Former Plaintiff Crawford, Eleanor, Plaintiff-Intervenor Crittenden, Tyler, Former Plaintiff Cromer, Brent, Plaintiff-Intervenor Crook, Bonnie, Plaintiff-Intervenor Crook, Thomas, Plaintiff-Intervenor Crotty, Aaron, Plaintiff Cruz, Adolfo, Former Plaintiff
Page 10 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 196. 197. 198. 199. 200. 201. 202. 203. 204. 205. 206. 207. 208. 209. 210. 211. 212. 213. 214. 215. Cruz, Patricia, Former Plaintiff Cudmore, Elizabeth, Former Plaintiff Cunningham, Daniel, Plaintiff-Intervenor Cunningham, Judy, Plaintiff-Intervenor Cunningham, Robert, Plaintiff-Intervenor Currie, Margaret, Plaintiff Currie, Maryann, Plaintiff Dalton, Erin, Former Plaintiff Davidson, Gary, Counsel to Plaintiffs, Case No. 09-20657 GOLD Davis, Kristine, Plaintiff-Intervenor Davis, Marjorie, Former Plaintiff DCS Dominican Construction Services, S.A., Defendant Dean, Debra, Plaintiff-Intervenor De Marchena, Enrique, Defendant De Marchena, Kaluche & Asociados, Defendant De Niz Garcia, Severina, Plaintiff-Intervenor Desarrollos Mirador Cofresi, S.A., Defendant Dethvongsa, Bounlay, Former Plaintiff Dethvongsa, Tiang, Former Plaintiff Del Toro, Jesus, Former Plaintiff
Page 11 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 216. 217. 218. 219. 220. 221. 222. 223. 224. 225. 226. 227. 228. 229. 230. 231. 232. 233. 234. 235. Diaz, Esmeralda, Former Plaintiff Diaz, Gabriel, Plaintiff Diaz, Michael, Counsel to Plaintiffs, Case No. 09-20657-GOLD Diaz, Reus & Targ, LLP, Counsel to Plaintiffs, Case No. 09-20657 GOLD Diele, Nancy, Plaintiff-Intervenor Duffin, Bettie Ellen, Plaintiff-Intervenor Dugmore, Geoffrey, Plaintiff Duke, Elizabeth, Former Plaintiff Dunn, Paul, Plaintiff-Intervenor Durinick, Michael, Former Plaintiff Durinick, Suzette, Former Plaintiff Elbom, Jonathan, Plaintiff-Intervenor Elliott, Derek, Defendant Elliott, Frederick, Defendant Elliott Miches Holdings, Inc., Defendant Elliott Regent Holdings, Inc., Defendant Elliot Toscana Holdings, Inc., Defendant EMI Cofresi Developments, Inc., Defendant EMI Resorts, Inc., Defendant EMI Resorts Management (S.V.G), Inc., Defendant
Page 12 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 236. 237. 238. 239. 240. 241. 242. 243. 244. 245. 246. 247. 248. 249. 250. 251. 252. 253. 254. 255. EMI Sun Village, Inc., Defendant Escobedo, Maria Juana, Plaintiff Esparza, Omar, Former Plaintiff Eyre, Kelee, Former Plaintiff Eyre, Pat, Former Plaintiff Faenzi-Glass, Deanna, Plaintiff-Intervenor Falkowski, Joanne, Plaintiff-Intervenor Farias, Aracelis, Plaintiff Farias, Victor, Plaintiff Felton, Charles, Plaintiff-Intervenor Ferdows, Sarah, Former Plaintiff Ferguson-Johnson, Judith, Plaintiff Fernandez, Maria (Marcia), Plaintiff-Intervenor Fierro Hernandez, Maria, Plaintiff-Intervenor Fillmore, Judy, Former Plaintiff Fitzwater, Alice, Plaintiff-Intervenor Flood, Gertrude, Plaintiff-Intervenor Flood, Kathleen, Plaintiff-Intervenor Flyn, Kerry, Plaintiff-Intervenor Foust, Jaden, Former Plaintiff
Page 13 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 256. 257. 258. 259. 260. 261. 262. 263. 264. 265. 266. 267. 268. 269. 270. 271. 272. 273. 274. 275. Frame, Brent, Former Plaintiff Frame Sorenson, Robin, Plaintiff Francom, Karen, Plaintiff Francom, Rick, Plaintiff Franklin, Barbara, Former Plaintiff Freese, Thomas, Plaintiff-Intervenor Fregoso, Linda, Plaintiff-Intervenor Frye, Linda, Plaintiff Gabriela Vera, Luz, Former Plaintiff Galvan, Adan, Plaintiff Garcia, Clementina, Plaintiff Garcia, Kristi, Former Plaintiff Garcia, Lamberto, Plaintiff Garcia, Maly, Plaintiff Garcia, Margarita, Former Plaintiff Garcia, Presiliano, Former Plaintiff Garcia, Ruben, Former Plaintiff Garcia Ceja, Roberto, Former Plaintiff Garcia-Lopez, Maria, Plaintiff-Intervenor Garcia Ramos, Jesus, Former Plaintiff
Page 14 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 276. 277. 278. 279. 280. 281. 282. 283. 284. 285. 286. 287. 288. 289. 290. 291. 292. 293. 294. 295. Gardea, Robert, Plaintiff-Intervenor Gardiner, Diane, Plaintiff-Intervenor Gardiner, John, Plaintiff-Intervenor Gardner, Nanalee Kershaw, Former Plaintiff Garza, Tracy, Plaintiff-Intervenor Gayosso Negrete, Calixto, Plaintiff-Intervenor Genter, Duane, Former Plaintiff Genter, Judy, Former Plaintiff Gervais, Jamie, Plaintiff Gervais, Leila, Plaintiff-Intervenor Gervais, Yves, Plaintiff Gibson, Jeannie, Former Plaintiff Gibson, Mike, Former Plaintiff Gilbert, Douglas, Plaintiff-Intervenor Giron, Argelio, Former Plaintiff Giron, Cupertino, Former Plaintiff Giron-Alvarez, Victor, Plaintiff-Intervenor Goitom, Fessahaie, Plaintiff-Intervenor Gold, Alan S. – District Court Judge Gomez, Homobono, Plaintiff-Intervenor
Page 15 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 296. 297. 298. 299. 300. 301. 302. 303. 304. 305. 306. 307. 308. 309. 310. 311. 312. 313. 314. 315. Gomez, Luisa, Former Plaintiff Gomez, Pedro, Former Plaintiff Gonzalez, Roberto, Former Plaintiff Gonzalez, Albino, Plaintiff-Intervenor Gonzalez, Ana, Plaintiff-Intervenor Gonzalez, Antonio, Plaintiff-Intervenor Gonzalez, Carlos, Former Plaintiff Gonzalez, Carlos, Counsel to Plaintiffs, Case No. 09-20657-GOLD Gonzalez, Cecilia, Former Plaintiff Gonzalez, Fernando, Plaintiff Gonzalez, Finy, Plaintiff Gonzalez, Lisbeth, Plaintiff Gonzalez, Maria, Plaintiff-Intervenor Gonzalez, Moises, Plaintiff-Intervenor Gonzalez, Santos, Plaintiff Grant, Miles, Plaintiff Gresset, Rosemarie, Former Plaintiff Grijalava, Mary, Former Plaintiff Groo, Neldon, Former Plaintiff Groo, Peggy, Former Plaintiff
Page 16 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 316. 317. 318. 319. 320. 321. 322. 323. 324. 325. 326. 327. 328. 329. 330. 331. 332. 333. 334. 335. Grozman, Lena, Plaintiff-Intervenor Gurrola, Jose, Plaintiff-Intervenor Gurrola, Sonia, Plaintiff-Intervenor Gutierrez, Adan, Plaintiff Gutierrez, Florita, Former Plaintiff Gurtierrez, Manuela, Plaintiff Guyman, Greg, Plaintiff-Intervenor Guymon, Mark, Plaintiff-Intervenor Guymon, Paige, Plaintiff-Intervenor Guzman, Jesus, Plaintiff-Intervenor Gyurkovitz, Diana, Plaintiff Gyurkovitz, Gary, Plaintiff Hadaway, Brant, Counsel to Plaintiffs, Case No. 09-20657-GOLD Hall, Brian, Plaintiff-Intervenor Hall, Bruce, Plaintiff-Intervenor Hall, George, Plaintiff Hall, Tyler, Plaintiff-Intervenor Handy, Meghan, Plaintiff-Intervenor Handy, Raymond, Plaintiff-Intervenor Handy, Truman, Plaintiff-Intervenor
Page 17 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 336. 337. 338. 339. 340. 341. 342. 343. 344. 345. 346. 347. 348. 349. 350. 351. 352. 353. 354. 355. Hansen, Alyson, Plaintiff-Intervenor Hansen, Clayton, Plaintiff-Intervenor Hansen, Karen, Plaintiff-Intervenor Harris, Ann, Plaintiff-Intervenor Hayes, Belinda, Plaintiff-Intervenor Hayson, Russsell, Counsel to Defendant Inversiones Aviati Heisler, Robert, Former Plaintiff Henry, Cynthia, Plaintiff Henry, Lawrence, Plaintiff Hernandez, Alejandro, Former Plaintiff Hernandez, Armando, Former Plaintiff Hernandez, Jose, Former Plaintiff Hernandez, Karina, Former Plaintiff Hernandez, Maria Fierro, Plaintiff Hernandez, Miguel Cortez, Plaintiff Hernandez, Rogelio, Former Plaintiff Hernandez, Yesenia, Former Plaintiff Hernandez, Mauricio, Former Plaintiff Hernandez,-Valle, Edwardo, Plaintiff-Intervenor Herrera, Grace, Plaintiff
Page 18 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 356. 357. 358. 359. 360. 361. 362. 363. 364. 365. 366. 367. 368. 369. 370. 371. 372. 373. 374. 375. Hez D., Blanca, Plaintiff-Intervenor Hingham, James, Plaintiff-Intervenor Hixson, Amy, Plaintiff Hixson, Daniel, Plaintiff Hofmann, Klaus, Plaintiff Hoge, Peter, Plaintiff Hopkins, Adam, Former Plaintiff House, Gary, Plaintiff-Intervenor Howard, David, Former Plaintiff Howard, Ila, Former Plaintiff Howard, Steve, Former Plaintiff Howard, Susan, Former Plaintiff Howard-Matuck, Norma, Former Plaintiff HSV Holdings, S.A., Defendant HSV Hoteles de Operadora, S.A., Defendant Huay de Silva, Nicolasa, Plaintiff-Intervenor Hudson, Trent, Plaintiff-Intervenor Humphries, Kris, Plaintiff-Intervenor Hyde, Claudia, Former Plaintiff Hyde, Garnet, Former Plaintiff
Page 19 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 376. 377. 378. 379. 380. 381. 382. 383. 384. 385. 386. 387. 388. 389. 390. 391. 392. 393. 394. 395. Ibarra, Antonio, Former Plaintiff Ibarra, Carolina, Former Plaintiff Inmobiliaria Canadaigua, S.A., Defendant Inmobiliaria Liros Del Tropico, S.A., Defendant Inmobiliaria Moncey, S.A., Defendant Inversiones Aviati, S.A., Defendant Inversiones Yubaso, S.A., Defendant Iruegas, Gilbert, Plaintiff-Intervenor Irvine, Cheryl, Former Plaintiff Irvine, James, Former Plaintiff Irvine, James Robert, Jr., Former Plaintiff Jacinto, Elia, Plaintiff Jacinto, Ignacio, Plaintiff Jacks, Cheryl, Plaintiff-Intervenor Javor, Chad, Former Plaintiff Jenkins, Allen, Plaintiff-Intervenor Jeong, In Young, Former Plaintiff Jeong, Peter, Plaintiff Jeong, Won, Former Plaintiff Jimenez, Rodolfo, Former Plaintiff
Page 20 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 396. 397. 398. 399. 400. 401. 402. 403. 404. 405. 406. 407. 408. 409. 410. 411. 412. 413. 414. 415. Jing, Gilbert, Plaintiff-Intervenor Johnson, Edith, Plaintiff-Intervenor Johnson, Michelle, Plaintiff-Intervenor Jones, Don, Former Plaintiff Jones, Evelyn, Plaintiff Jones-Most, Yvonne, Former Plaintiff Junio, Frank, Plaintiff-Intervenor Junio, Rhonda, Plaintiff-Intervenor Kahebram, S.A., Defendant Kannady, Mariann, Counsel to Elliot Defendants Kassel, John, Plaintiff-Intervenor Kassel, Patricia, Plaintiff-Intervenor Kaplin, Lawrence, Former Plaintiff Kay, John, Plaintiff-Intervenor Kazoku, LLC, Former Plaintiff Kim, Moon, Plaintiff-Intervenor Kirby, Sean, Plaintiff-Intervenor Kirby-Irvine, Minh Thu, Former Plaintiff Kitt, Carol, Plaintiff-Intervenor Kitt, Robert, Plaintiff-Intervenor
Page 21 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 416. 417. 418. 419. 420. 421. 422. 423. 424. 425. 426. 427. 428. 429. 430. 431. 432. 433. 434. 435. Koontz, Ann, Former Plaintiff Kopriva, Crandon, Plaintiff-Intervenor Krinsky, Alisa, Plaintiff-Intervenor Krutt, Sharon, Former Plaintiff Kuck, Donna, Plaintiff Kuck, Shelia, Plaintiff Lai, May Shin, Plaintiff Laloli, Jeanne, Plaintiff-Intervenor Lamb, Bryan, Plaintiff Lamb, Susan, Plaintiff Landmark Lending Corporation, Defendant Lane, Yvonne, Former Plaintiff Langford, Daniel, Former Plaintiff Lappa, Lita, Former Plaintiff Lara, Raul, Former Plaintiff Lara, Sol, Former Plaintiff Latourette, Amy, Plaintiff-Intervenor Laura Espinoza, Dora, Former Plaintiff Lawrence, James, Plaintiff-Intervenor Lawrence, Wendy, Plaintiff-Intervenor
Page 22 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 436. 437. 438. 439. 440. 441. 442. 443. 444. 445. 446. 447. 448. 449. 450. 451. 452. 453. 454. 455. Lawter, Michael, Defendant Lawter, Tippy Tan, Defendant Lee, May, Plaintiff-Intervenor Lee, Richard, Plaintiff-Intervenor Lee, Wayland, Plaintiff-Intervenor Lewis, Barbara, Plaintiff-Intervenor Leyva, Norma Julieta, Plaintiff-Intervenor Leyva Aguilar, Martin, Plaintiff-Intervenor Lieberman, Robert, Former Plaintiff Linebaugh, Earl, Plaintiff-Intervenor Linebaugh, Rita, Plaintiff-Intervenor Lingzi, Li, Plaintiff Littledike, Dan, Former Plaintiff Littledike, Marcene, Former Plaintiff Looper, Ed, Plaintiff-Intervenor Looper, Emelia Plaintiff-Intervenor Looper, Jill, Plaintiff Looper, Louis (Tony), Plaintiff Lopez, Ana, Former Plaintiff Lopez, David, Former Plaintiff
Page 23 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 456. 457. 458. 459. 460. 461. 462. 463. 464. 465. 466. 467. 468. 469. 470. 471. 472. 473. 474. 475. Lopez, Elvira, Former Plaintiff Lopez, Fidencio, Plaintiff-Intervenor Lopez, Jose, Plaintiff-Intervenor Lopez, Leonor, Former Plaintiff Lopez, Margarito, Plaintiff-Intervenor Lopez, Tiburcio, Plaintiff-Intervenor Louder, Judy, Plaintiff-Intervenor Louder, Tony, Plaintiff-Intervenor Luna, Fidel, Former Plaintiff Luna, Nora, Former Plaintiff Madrigal, Mayra, Former Plaintiff Madsen, Carmen, Plaintiff-Intervenor Madsen, Cheryl, Plaintiff-Intervenor Madsen, Douglas, Plaintiff-Intervenor Madsen, Mike, Plaintiff-Intervenor Majoulet-Foust, Janet, Former Plaintiff Maldonado, Alicia, Former Plaintiff Mancebo, Eugene, Plaintiff Mancebo, Geraldine, Plaintiff Mancebo, Shawn, Plaintiff
Page 24 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 476. 477. 478. 479. 480. 481. 482. 483. 484. 485. 486. 487. 488. 489. 490. 491. 492. 493. 494. 495. Mancilla, Nora, Plaintiff Mancilla, Raul, Plaintiff Manriquez, Elizabeth, Former Plaintiff Manriquez, Sergio, Former Plaintiff Manzo Alvarez, Ismael, Plaintiff-Intervenor Manzo de Reyes, Rozalba, Plaintiff Maravilla, Angel, Plaintiff-Intervenor Maravilla, Piedad, Plaintiff-Intervenor Martin, Anthony, Plaintiff-Intervenor Martin, Belinda, Former Plaintiff Martin, Lucia, Plaintiff-Intervenor Martin, Ozzie, Former Plaintiff Martin, Ozzie, Jr., Plaintiff-Intervenor Martinez, Elba, Former Plaintiff Martinez, Elio, Counsel to the Elliott Defendants Martinez, Gerardo, Former Plaintiff Mata, Judith, Former Plaintiff Mavavilla, Rogelio, Plaintiff-Intervenor McAliley, Chris, US Magistrate Judge McCahen, J. Former Plaintiff
Page 25 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 496. 497. 498. 499. 500. 501. 502. 503. 504. 505. 506. 507. 508. 509. 510. 511. 512. 513. 514. 515. McGirr, Michael, Plaintiff McKenna, Paul, Plaintiff-Intervenor McNeil, Billie Sue, Former Plaintiff McNeil, Michael, Former Plaintiff McVay, Charles, Former Plaintiff McVay, Diane, Plaintiff Mejia, Rama, Plaintiff Mejia, Rueben, Plaintiff Mendoza, Ausreberta, Plaintiff-Intervenor Mendoza, Almadelia, Plaintiff-Intervenor Mendoza, Jose, Plaintiff-Intervenor Meyer-Young, Chery, Plaintiff-Intervenor Miles, Jode, Former Plaintiff Miles, William, Former Plaintiff Millan, Emma, Plaintiff-Intervenor Millan, Jose, Plaintiff-Intervenor Miller, James, Plaintiff-Intervenor Mitchell, Marci, Former Plaintiff Moore, Gloria, Plaintiff Moore, Marla, Plaintiff
Page 26 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 516. 517. 518. 519. 520. 521. 522. 523. 524. 525. 526. 527. 528. 529. 530. 531. 532. 533. 534. 535. Moore, Shirley, Plaintiff-Intervenor Moran, Lorena, Former Plaintiff Moran, Patricio, Former Plaintiff Moreno, Alfredo, Plaintiff Moreno Reyes, Sonia, Plaintiff Morgan, Jeffrey, Plaintiff Most, Lee, Former Plaintiff MPS Ltd., S.A., Defendant Munoz Perez, Benjamin, Former Plaintiff Murray, Jilene, Plaintiff-Intervenor Murray, Susan, Former Plaintiff Musgrove, Thomas, Plaintiff-Intervenor Myers, Don, Plaintiff-Intervenor Myers, Shirley, Plaintiff-Intervenor Nagel, Barbara, Plaintiff Navarro, Rosa, Plaintiff-Intervenor Navarro, Sergio, Plaintiff-Intervenor Neilson, Daniel, Plaintiff-Intervenor Nessen, Dallas, Plaintiff Nessen, Deeann, Plaintiff
Page 27 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 536. 537. 538. 539. 540. 541. 542. 543. 544. 545. 546. 547. 548. 549. 550. 551. 552. 553. 554. 555. Net Wealth Navigators, LLC, Defendant Neville, Kent, Plaintiff Neville, Linda, Plaintiff Newbaum, Pam, Plaintiff-Intervenor Newbaum, Walter, Plaintiff-Intervenor Nielsen, Paul, Plaintiff Nilsson, Cory, Plaintiff Nilsson, Kirstin, Plaintiff Novoa, Yolanda,, Former Plaintiff Ochoa, Christobal, Former Plaintiff Ochoa, Veronica, Former Plaintiff O’Hagan, Tom, Former Plaintiff O’Hagan, Ruth, Former Plaintiff O’Hagan, Sheila, Former Plaintiff Olvera-Quijas, Juan, Plaintiff-Intervenor Orangeville Reservation Services, Ltd., Defendant Orozco, Alberto, Plaintiff-Intervenor Orozco, Norma, Plaintiff-Intervenor Ortiz, Alejandro, Former Plaintiff Ortiz, Loredana, Plaintiff-Intervenor
Page 28 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 556. 557. 558. 559. 560. 561. 562. 563. 564. 565. 566. 567. 568. 569. 570. 571. 572. 573. 574. 575. Ortiz, Mario, Plaintiff-Intervenor Osborn, Alicia, Plaintiff Osborn, James, Plaintiff Ova, Kathy, Plaintiff Padilla, Jacinto, Plaintiff-Intervenor Padilla, Maria, Former Plaintiff Page, Misty, Plaintiff-Intervenor Page, Travis, Plaintiff-Intervenor Palacio, Antonia, Former Plaintiff Palacio, Nieves, Former Plaintiff Palomino, Jesus, Former Plaintiff Panigua, Adolfo, Plaintiff-Intervenor Pardo, Herman, Former Plaintiff Pardo, Maricela, Former Plaintiff Parente, Matthew, Plaintiff-Intervenor Park, Spencer, Plaintiff-Intervenor Patton, Rae, Former Plaintifff Paz, Cynthia J., Former Plaintiff Paz, Ellis, Former Plaintiff Pena, Jose, Former Plaintiff
Page 29 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 576. 577. 578. 579. 580. 581. 582. 583. 584. 585. 586. 587. 588. 589. 590. 591. 592. 593. 594. 595. Perez, David, Former Plaintiff Perez, Daniel, Plaintiff-Intervenor Perez, Felipe, Plaintiff-Intervenor Perez, Guadalupe, Plaintiff-Intervenor Perez, Jose Jesus, Former Plaintiff Perez, Juan, Plaintiff-Intervenor Perez, Marcos, Plaintiff-Intervenor Perez, Maria, Plaintiff-Intervenor Perez, Maria Plaintiff-Intervenor Perez, Margarita, Former Plaintiff Perez, Vicente, Plaintiff-Intervenor Perry, Larae, Former Plaintiff Perry, Rodney, Former Plaintiff Peterson, Gary, Plaintiff Peterson, Shirleen, Plaintiff Peterson, Brian, Plaintiff-Intervenor Peterson, Lori, Plaintiff-Intervenor Petit, Milton, Plaintiff-Intervenor Phillips, Jennie, Plaintiff-Intervenor Phillips, Mildred, Plaintiff
Page 30 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 596. 597. 598. 599. 600. 601. 602. 603. 604. 605. 606. 607. 608. 609. 610. 611. 612. 613. 614. 615. Phillips, Nolan, Plaintiff-Intervenor Phillips, Richard, Plaintiff Piloto, Hilda, Counsel to Plaintiffs, Case No. 09-20526-GOLD Picket, Nancy, Former Plaintiff Pinto, Susan, Former Plaintiff Platz, Barbara, Former Plaintiff Polatis, Joyce, Plaintiff Polatis, Randy, Plaintiff Prater, Alice, Former Plaintiff Prater, Joseph, Former Plaintiff Price, Johnny, Former Plaintiff Promotora Xara, S.A., Defendant Puckett, Charles, Plaintiff-Intervenor Quinonez, Amelia, Former Plaintiff Rainey, Cindy, Plaintiff-Intervenor Rainey, Kevin, Plaintiff-Intervenor Ramirez, Adolfo, Plaintiff Ramirez, Clementina, Former Plaintiff Ramirez, Laura, Plaintiff Ramirez Soto, Olga, Plaintiff
Page 31 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 616. 617. 618. 619. 620. 621. 622. 623. 624. 625. 626. 627. 628. 629. 630. 631. 632. 633. 634. 635. Raygoza, Rita, Former Plaintiff Reid, Diane, Plaintiff Reide, Darlene, Former Plaintiff Reide, Norman, Former Plaintiff Reyes, Alberto, Plaintiff Reyes, Angela, Plaintiff Reyes, Daniel, Plaintiff Reyes, Enrique, Former Plaintiff Reyes Espinoza, Francisco, Plaintiff Reyes, Imelda, Plaintiff Reyes, Josefina, Former Plaintiff Reyes, Martin, Former Plaintiff Reyes, Rafael, Plaintiff Reyes, Sonia, Former Plaintiff Reyes, Trinidad, Former Plaintiff Reyes Espinosa, Vicente, Plaintiff Rice, Linda, Plaintiff-Intervenor Rice, Lowell, Plaintiff-Intervenor Riendel, Terry, Plaintiff Rightmyer, Robert, Counsel to Special Master
Page 32 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 636. 637. 638. 639. 640. 641. 642. 643. 644. 645. 646. 647. 648. 649. 650. 651. 652. 653. 654. 655. Rivera, Fructuso, Former Plaintiff Rivera, Leonila, Plaintiff Rivera, Martin, Plaintiff Roberts-Cagle, Sharon, Plaintiff Roberts, Charlyn, Plaintiff-Intervenor Rocha, Abel, Plaintiff-Intervenor Rocheford, Danielle, Plaintiff Rocheford, David, Plaintiff Rodriguez, Jovita, Former Plaintiff Rodriguez, Juan, Plaintiff-Intervenor Rodriguez, Victor, Former Plaintiff Rogers, Judith, Plaintiff-Intervenor Rosas, Elias, Former Plaintiff Rosas Nieto, Jose, Former Plaintiff Rosegreen, Warren, Former Plaintiff Rossiter, Joe, Plaintiff-Intervenor Rossiter, Ima Jean, Plaintiff-Intervenor Royston, Tonia, Plaintiff Rueda, Graciela, Former Plaintiff Ruiz, Angel Osorio, Former Plaintiff
Page 33 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 656. 657. 658. 659. 660. 661. 662. 663. 664. 665. 666. 667. 668. 669. 670. 671. 672. 673. 674. 675. Ruvalcaba, Consuelo, Former Plaintiff Ruvalcaba, Martin, Former Plaintiff Ruvalcaba, Daisy, Former Plaintiff Sabel, Marco, Plaintiff-Intervenor Sabel, Sharon, Plaintiff-Intervenor Saldana, Ester, Former Plaintiff Saldana, Felipe, Former Plaintiff Salter, David, Former Plaintiff Salter, Kathryn, Former Plaintiff Sanchez, David, Former Plaintiff Sanchez, Jose Luis, Plaintiff-Intervenor Sanchez, Martin, Former Plaintiff Sanchez, Nancy, Former Plaintiff Sanchez, Ruben, Former Plaintiff Sanchez, Samuel, Plaintiff-Intervenor Sanchez, Yolanda, Former Plaintiff Sawyer, Greg, Former Plaintiff Sayre, Terry, Former Plaintiff Schneider, Richard, Former Plaintiff Scott, Thomas, Special Master
Page 34 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 676. 677. 678. 679. 680. 681. 682. 683. 684. 685. 686. 687. 688. 689. 690. 691. 692. 693. 694. 695. Scott, Peter, Plaintiff-Intervenor Shipton, Robert, Plaintiff-Intervenor Shipton, Sondra, Plaintiff-Intervenor Silva Barrera, Ramiro Esrain, Plaintiff-Intervenor Silva, Raul, Plaintiff-Intervenor Silva Meza, Miguel, Plaintiff-Intervenor Simas, Angela, Plaintiff-Intervenor Simpson, Allen, Former Plaintiff Simpson, Dustin, Plaintiff-Intervenor Simpson, Paul, Plaintiff-Intervenor Shelton, Robert, Former Plaintiff Sisa-At, Danou, Plaintiff-Intervenor Skelton, Jared, Plaintiff-Intervenor Skelton, Jenni, Plaintiff-Intervenor Skelton, Susan, Former Plaintiff Smith, Gloria, Plaintiff-Intervenor Smith, Heidi, Plaintiff Smith, Jerry, Former Plaintiff Smith, Richard, Plaintiff Snider, George, Former Plaintiff
Page 35 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 696. 697. 698. 699. 700. 701. 702. 703. 704. 705. 706. 707. 708. 709. 710. 711. 712. 713. 714. 715. Snider, Martha, Plaintiff Sniezko, Jim, Plaintiff-Intervenor Sola, Shirley, Plaintiff Solorio Nunez, Jorge, Plaintiff-Intervenor Soltero, Jose, Plaintiff-Intervenor Soltero, Magdalena, Plaintiff-Intervenor Soltis, James, Plaintiff-Intervenor Soltis, Rosalind, Plaintiff-Intervenor Sorenson, Norman, Plaintiff Soria, Carlos, Former Plaintiff-Intervenor Soto, Roberto, Plaintiff Southwick, Jill, Plaintiff-Intervenor Southwick, Stanton, Plaintiff-Intervenor Spence, Martha, Plaintiff-Intervenor Stewart, Clark, Plaintiff Stewart, Myra, Plaintiff Stockdale, Yasuko, Plaintiff-Intervenor Stockle, Carly, Plaintiff Stockle, Ryan, Plaintiff Stockle, Thomas, Plaintiff-Intervenor
Page 36 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 716. 717. 718. 719. 720. 721. 722. 723. 724. 725. 726. 727. 728. 729. 730. 731. 732. 733. 734. 735. Sublette, Lori, Plaintiff-Intervenor Sublette, William, Plaintiff-Intervenor Sun Village Juan Dolio, Inc., Defendant Syliphone, Sam, Plaintiff-Intervenor Tabbert, Bill, Plaintiff-Intervenor Tabbert, Linda, Plaintiff-Intervenor Tanner, Kathleen, Plaintiff-Intervenor Tanner, Steven, Plaintiff-Intervenor Tapia, Maria, Plaintiff-Intervenor Taylor, Chris, Plaintiff-Intervenor Taylor, Clint, Former Plaintiff Taylor, Kim, Former Plaintiff Taylor, Nancy, Former Plaintiff Tenedora HSV [B.P.], S.A., Defendant Terrell-Lane, Warrenetta, Plaintiff-Intervenor Tello, Georgina, Plaintiff-Intervenor Teves, Larry, Plaintiff Teves, Ruth, Plaintiff Thomson, John, Former Plaintiff Thompson, Gary, Plaintiff-Intervenor
Page 37 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 736. 737. 738. 739. 740. 741. 742. 743. 744. 745. 746. 747. 748. 749. 750. 751. 752. 753. 754. 755. Thompson, Kerry, Plaintiff-Intervenor Thorne, Nancy, Plaintiff Thorton, Gordon, Plaintiff-Intervenor Torres, Bonifacio, Former Plaintiff Torres, Luis, Plaintiff-Intervenor Torres, Maria, Plaintiff-Intervenor Torres, Maribel, Plaintiff-Intervenor Tran, Christol, Plaintiff-Intervenor Tran, Kenny, Plaintiff-Intervenor Traub, Pauline, Plaintiff-Intervenor Valdez, Catherine, Plaintiff Valdez, Ruth, Plaintiff-Intervenor Valez C., Arturo, Former Plaintiff Valencia, Griselda, Plaintiff-Intervenor Valencia de Mendoza, Juan, Plaintiff-Intervenor Valencia, Octavio, Plaintiff-Intervenor Valencia, Pureza, Plaintiff-Intervenor Vargas, Francisco, Plaintiff Vargas, Rosa, Plaintiff Varin, Jacques, Former Plaintiff
Page 38 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 756. 757. 758. 759. 760. 761. 762. 763. 764. 765. 766. 767. 768. 769. 770. 771. 772. 773. 774. 775. Vaughn, George, Plaintiff Vazquez, Dan, Former Plaintiff Vazquez, Oscar, Former Plaintiff Vega, Carmen, Former Plaintiff Vega, Miguel, Former Plaintiff Verano, Chris, Plaintiff Verano, Cynthia, Plaintiff Verano, Mario, Former Plaintiff Verkaik, Jennifer, Plaintiff-Intervenor Verkaik, John, Plaintiff-Intervenor Vidas, Cheryl, Plaintiff Vidas, Victor, Plaintiff Villa Santa Ponca, S.A., Defendant Villagomez, Marcella, Plaintiff-Intervenor Villanueva, Luis, Former Plaintiff Wallace, Kenneth, Plaintiff-Intervenor Wallace, Kamille, Plaintiff-Intervenor Walpole, Rolf, Plaintiff-Intervenor Walters, David, Plaintiff Walters, Elizabeth, Plaintiff
Page 39 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 776. 777. 778. 779. 780. 781. 782. 783. 784. 785. 786. 787. 788. 789. 790. 791. 792. 793. 794. 795. Wann, Bobbi Li, Plaintiff Wann, Richard, Plaintiff Waring, Nancy, Plaintiff-Intervenor Webb, John, Plaintiff-Intervenor Webb, Terry, Plaintiff-Intervenor Welsch, James, Plaintiff Welsch, Teri, Plaintiff White, Elva, Plaintiff White, Justin, Plaintiff-Intervenor White, Kecia, Plaintiff-Intervenor Whiting, Lucille, Plaintiff-Intervenor Wilcox, Heidi, Plaintiff-Intervenor Wilcox, Lamont, Plaintiff-Intervenor Wilcox, Pam, Plaintiff-Intervenor Wilcox, Ray, Plaintiff-Intervenor Wilson, Robert, Former Plaintiff Williams, Graig, Plaintiff-Intervenor Williams, Kay, Plaintiff-Intervenor Winter, Charles, Former Plaintiff Win, Sandra, Plaintiff-Intervenor
Page 40 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 796. 797. 798. 799. 800. 801. 802. 803. 804. 805. 806. 807. 808. 809. 810. 811. 812. Winter, Katherine, Former Plaintiff Withington, Amy, Former Plaintiff Wolf, Jeffrey, Plaintiff-Intervenor Wolf, Lolita, Plaintiff-Intervenor Woodward, Brent, Plaintiff Woodward, Brian, Plaintiff-Intervenor Woodward, Michele, Plaintiff WWIN International Limited, Defendant Yan Wong, Koil, Plaintiff-Intervenor Yeager, Paul, Former Plaintiff Yepez Uribe, Rafael, Plaintiff-Intervenor Young, Rebecca, Plaintiff-Intervenor Young, Steven, Plaintiff- Intervenor Zamudio, Estela, Plaintiff-Intervenor Zamudio, Martin, Plaintiff-Intervenor Zavala, Francisco, Former Plaintiff Zotti, Deborah, Plaintiff

Page 41 of 41

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT No publicly held corporation owns 10% or more of any EMI Corporate Defendant's stock. The EMI Corporate Defendants are privately held companies.

i
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 STATEMENT REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT This appeal challenges the District Court's Order Following Hearing on Plaintiffs' Joint Motion for Order to show cause [DE 474]; Appointing Monitor by Agreement of the Parties (the "Monitor Order") [D.E. 528], pursuant to which the District Court expanded the duties of Special Master Thomas E. Scott by appointing him "Monitor" based on the alleged agreement of the parties. As more fully described in this Brief, although the EMI Corporate Defendants did agree to expand the duties of the Special Master as circumscribed by the terms set forth in the "One Page Memorandum" [D.E. 524-1] the EMI Corporate Defendants never agreed to the appointment of a Monitor as more fully described herein. However, the Monitor Order entered by the District Court is materially and adversely different from the One Page Memorandum. Indeed, the EMI Corporate

Defendants did not have the opportunity to review, modify or comment upon the draft of the Monitor Order prior to its entry by the Court. Accordingly, the EMI Corporate Defendants did not and could not have agreed to the Monitor Order. Oral argument will assist with the Court's analysis of what, exactly, was agreed upon by the parties and why the District Court's entry of the Monitor Order represents reversible error on the part of the District Court.

ii
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 TABLE OF CONTENTS CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS................................................... i CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT..................................................... i STATEMENT REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT .......................................... ii TABLE OF CITATIONS ........................................................................................v STATEMENT REGARDING ADOPTION OF BRIEFS OF OTHER PARTIES PURSUANT TO ELEVENTH CIRCUIT RULE 28-1(f) .............. viii STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION.................................................................... ix STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES............................................................................1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE...............................................................................2 I. Relevant Background ....................................................................................3 A. District Court Litigation............................................................................3 B. Turks and Caicos Islands Litigation ........................................................6 C. Dominican Republic Litigation.................................................................7 II. Course of Proceedings And Dispositions in District Court and

Statement of Facts ................................................................................................9 III. Standard of Review ..................................................................................17

SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ...................................................................18

iii
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 ARGUMENT AND CITATIONS OF AUTHORITY ........................................19 I. II. The Agreed Order Must be Analyzed Pursuant to the Law of Contracts . The EMI Corporate Defendants Did Not Agree to the Terms of the Monitor Order as Entered.......................................................................22

CONCLUSION.......................................................................................................28 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH TYPE-VOLUME LIMITATION TYPEFACE REQUIREMENTS AND TYPE STYLE RQUIREMENTS .......29 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ............................................................................30 SERVICE LIST......................................................................................................31

iv
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 TABLE OF CITATIONS CASES Aureilo Aguilar et al. v. EMI Resorts, Inc., Case No. 09-20657 ...............................2 Boatman v. Sullivan, 1990 WL 146699 (N.D.Ill. Oct. 1, 1990) ..............................18 Brooks v. Georgia State Bd. of Elections, 59 F.3d 1114, 1119 (11th Cir. 1995) ....23 Caley v. Gulfstream Aerospace Corp., 428 F.3d 1359, 1373 (11th Cir. 2005).......21 Carroll v. Carroll, 532 So.2d 1109 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988) .......................................21 * City of Covington v. Covington Landing, Ltd. P'ship., 71 F.3d 1221, 1227 (6th Cir.1995) ..................................................................................................... 17, 19, 23 Cotton v. Hinton, 559 F.2d 1326, 1331-1332 (5th Cir. 1977) .................................24 EEOC v. New York Times Co., 196 F.3d 72, 78 (2d Cir.1999) ...............................26 Elan Corp., PLC v. Andrx Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 272 F.Supp 2d. 1325, 1340 (S.D.Fla. 2002) rev'd on other grounds 366 F.3d 1336 (Fed,Cir. 2004) .................22 * Evans v. Jeff D., 475 U.S. 717, 727 (1986) .........................................................23 Holmes v. Continental Can Co., 706 F.2d 1144, 1160 (11th Cir. 1983).................23 In re 360 Inns, Ltd., 76 B.R. 573, 578 (Bankr.N.D.Tex.1987)................................18 In re Continental Airlines Corp., 907 F.2d 1500, 1508 n. 6 (5th Cir.1990)............18 * In re Delaney's II, Inc., 1991 WL 337625 at *2 (N.D.Ill. June 12, 1991).... 18, 20

v
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 * Local Number 93, Int'l Ass'n of Firefighters, AFL-CIO v. City of Cleveland, 478 U.S. 501, 522 (1986) ............................................................................................23 Jacksonville Branch, NAACP v. Duval County School Bd., 978 F.2d 1574, 1578 (11th Cir. 1992)........................................................................................................17 Long Term Mgmt., Inc. v. Univ. Nursing Center, Inc., 704 So.2d 669, 673 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) ...............................................................................................................21 Nelson v. Target Corp., 2009 WL 2150893 at * 2 (M.D.Fla. July 13, 2009) .........21 Paradise v. Prescott, 767 F.2d 1514, 1525 (11th Cir.1985), aff'd 480 U.S. 149 (1987) .......................................................................................................................17 * Reynolds v. Roberts, 202 F.3d 1303, 1313 (11th Cir. 2000) .................. 17, 24, 27 * Robbie v. City of Miami, 469 So.2d 1384, 1385 (Fla.1985) ................................20 * Sands v. Wagner & Hunt, P.A., 2009 WL 2730469 at *2 (S.D.Fla. Aug. 28, 2009) .....................................................................................................................20 Schwartz v. Fla. Bd. of Regents, 807 F.2d 901, 905 (11th Cir.1987)......................20 United States v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 420 U.S. 223, 238 (1975) ...............17 * United States v. Ward Baking Co., 376 U.S. 327, 333-334 (1964) .....................23

vi
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 STATUTES 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) ...............................................................................................2, 9 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(2)....................................................................................... ix, 17 RULES Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A) ................................................................................. ix, 17 Fed.R.App.P. 32(a)(5)..............................................................................................30 Fed.R.App.P. 32(a)(6)..............................................................................................30 Fed.R.App.P. 32(a)(7)(B) ........................................................................................30 Fed.R.App.P. 32(a)(7)(B)(iii) ..................................................................................30 Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(a)(1)) ..........................................................................................10 TREATISES Corbin on Contacts § 1.11 .......................................................................................22 * Restatement (Second) of Contracts, § 24………………………………………21 * Restatement (Second) of Contracts, § 26………………………………………21

vii
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 STATEMENT REGARDING ADOPTION OF BRIEFS OF OTHER PARTIES PURSUANT TO ELEVENTH CIRCUIT RULE 28-1(f) The EMI Corporate Defendants adopt by reference the following portions of the Brief for Appellants Enrique De Marchena and De Marchena Kaluche & Asociados (the "DMK Brief"): 1. 2. 3. 4. Statement Regarding Oral Argument, DMK Brief at vii. Statement of Jurisdiction, DMK Brief at 1. Standard of Review, DMK Brief at 3. Statement of the Facts, DMK Brief at 4 through 8.

viii
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(2) as more fully described in the EMI Appellants' Response to Jurisdictional Questions. This Appeal is Timely The Court entered the Monitor Order on July 17, 2009. On August 14, 2009, within 30 days of the entry of the Monitor Order, the EMI Corporate Defendants filed their Notice of Appeal [D.E. 623] with the District Court pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A).

ix
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES Whether the District Court erred by entering its Order Following Hearing on Plaintiffs' Joint Motion for Order to show cause [DE 474]; Appointing Monitor by Agreement of the Parties (the "Monitor Order") [D.E. 528] where the EMI Corporate Defendants did not review, comment upon or agree to the terms of the Monitor Order as entered.

1
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 STATEMENT OF THE CASE This case is a civil Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations ("RICO") case, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c), based on allegations made by Appellee/Plaintiff Klaus Hoffman ("Plaintiff") against Frederick and Derek Elliott (collectively, "the Elliotts") and their companies (collectively with the Elliotts, the "Elliott Defendants") and other defendants (collectively with the Elliott Defendants, the "Defendants")2. A companion case styled Aureilo Aguilar et al. v. EMI Resorts, Inc., Case No. 09-20657 (collectively with Case No. 09-20626, the "District Court Cases") was subsequently filed against the Defendants, but that case was abruptly and voluntarily dismissed by the "Aguilar Plaintiffs" on October 17, 2009 after the District Court held that the Aguilar Plaintiffs failed to state a claim "even when coupled with the Civil RICO Case Statement" (Omnibus Order at 3 [D.E. 714]). In an effort to assist this Court with its understanding of the procedural complexities of this case that resulted in the Gordian knot the District Court was trying to untangle when it appointed the Special Master and then Monitor, the EMI
Not all of the Elliott Defendants have participated in this Appeal. Accordingly, for the avoidance of confusion, while reference herein to the "Elliott Defendants" must necessarily include the EMI Corporate Defendants (a/k/a EMI Appellants) reference to the EMI Corporate Defendants does not include all Elliott Defendants. 2
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

2

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 Corporate Defendants provide the following brief background of the genesis of the District Court Cases and their relationship to cases pending in the Turks and Caicos Islands and the Dominican Republic. I. Relevant Background A. 1. District Court Litigation Beginning in October 2008, James Catledge, the founder and Chief

Executive Officer of Impact, and its successors, Impact Networth, and Networth Solutions – essentially network marketing companies – retained the law firm of Diaz Reus to represent a group of investors (including without limitation, Rick Hawker, Ruben Meja, David Rocheford, Richard Smith, Norm Sorensen, Steve Thompson and Martha Valeria), who had formed a committee that wished to sue the Elliotts, called the "EClient Committee" ("ECC"). 2. The ECC – through the use of the internet (www.eclientscom.com)

and telephone solicitation – had been recruiting investors to join in a collective action against the Elliott Defendants. James Catledge was a financial backer and participant – if not the mastermind – of this group. 3. Sometime in November, 2008, the ECC was convinced to retain the

3
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 Diaz Reus law firm to "investigate the actions of Derek & Frederick Elliott and their representatives in connection with the sale of fractional real estate, residences products and other interests in the Dominican Republic referred by Impact, Impact Net Worth, Net Worth Solutions and/or other related entities and individuals."3 4. On November 13, 2008, Diaz wrote a letter to the members of the

ECC informing them that James Catledge and Impact officers Tom O'Hagan and John Thomson had contributed to the ECC Retainer Fund and that the ECC would not sue these individuals or Impact in any legal action.4 5. Over the ensuing four (4) months, the Diaz Reus team reviewed

thousands of documents "in the six figure range"5 and used the ruse of criminal prosecution to purportedly "flip" Gregory Clark, the Elliott Companies' former Chief Financial Officer, and improperly extract confidential and privileged information from him regarding the operations of the "Elliott Group of Companies."6

3

Diaz Reus Letter of November 13, 2008 at 1, [D.E. 617 -4]. Id. at 2.

4

Transcript of February 17, 2009 Conference Call at 3, contained in Declaration of Rob Buenaflor [D.E. 173-9].
6

5

R. Farzad, "Big Game Asset Hunters", at 5-6, [D.E. 617 -6]. 4

LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 6. In a February 17, 2009, conference call with investors and ECC

Clients, Diaz told the investors that he had proof that they were victimized by the Elliotts, and not Catledge: There is overwhelming evidence that everyone that's on this phone is a victim of a million, several million dollar, hundreds of millions of dollar, in fraud. We have the evidence, not just the testimony. We have the actual documents that support the allegations that you were victimized. Not by the sales groups but by the Elliotts. We have worked tirelessly since around December when we first received the documents, and continue to receive additional documents that corroborate that you were victims of this massive fraud.7 7. During this same conference call, Richard Smith, head of the ECC,

explained the Diaz' strategy: "[W]e're taking the kind of action that when we launch this lawsuit it will be so overwhelming that the battle will be won at the time we launch."8 8. On March 3, 2009, the ECC "launched" its litigation by having Klaus

Hofmann file a 52-page RICO complaint. Subsequently, on March 13, 2009, Aurelio Aguilar and 414 former Impact agents filed a RICO complaint that simply parroted the Hofmann complaint, including attaching Hofmann's contracts as

Transcript of February 17, 2009 Conference Call at 6, contained in Declaration of Rob Buenaflor [D.E. 173-9] (emphasis added).
8

7

Id.

5
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 exhibits. B. 9. Turks and Caicos Islands Litigation On March 3, 2009, a combination of purported innocent investors

(Klaus Hoffman, David Rocheford, and Steve Thompson) and Impact agent investors (Norman Sorensen) filed a class action in the Turks and Caicos Islands on behalf of "all other persons, which I estimate to number about 1500, who form a class of persons who have contracted with the Defendants concerning the acquisition of time shares, and fractional condominium interests in resorts located in Puerto Plata and Juan Dolio in the Dominican Republic."9 This combination of investors also took the ex parte District Court TRO to the Turks and Caicos Islands and used it to obtain an ex parte Manerva Injunction from the Turks and Caicos Islands court. 10. In obtaining the Turks and Caicos Islands Injunction, Plaintiffs10 and

their counsel never informed the Turks and Caicos Islands' court of the expiration of the District Court TRO, and made additional misrepresentations concerning the

9

Carlos Gonzalez (of the Diaz law firm) Affidavit ¶ 4 (exhibits omitted), [D.E. 617 -11].

"Plaintiffs" as used throughout this Brief refers to the Hoffman Plaintiff, the intervenor plaintiffs as detailed in D.E. 4 and the Aguilar Plaintiffs of Case No. 09-20657 collectively.

10

6
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 background and status of this matter. After the Supreme Court of the Turks and Caicos Islands learned of the Plaintiffs' deceit, on April 9, 2009 that court discharged the Injunction, stating: This case causes me some disquiet. The timing of an application of this nature at the same time as a similar action in Florida, the failure to mention so many clearly important material facts in an affidavit prepared by an attorney specifically for an ex parte application, the subsequent manner in which the order was publicized and the failure to take similar action to advise of the amendment to the original order all add to that disquiet.11 11. The District Court was likewise concerned with the candor of the

Plaintiffs in this case, because it quoted this observation by the Supreme Court of the Turks and Caicos Islands in its Appointment Order. See D.E. 348 at 2-3. C. 12. Dominican Republic Litigation On May 1, 2009 and May 29, 2009, the Hofmann Plaintiffs and the

Aguilar Plaintiffs each obtained ex parte TROs from two different Dominican Republic courts, freezing the Elliott Group of Companies' assets and fatally wounding the Elliott Defendants' ability to complete the Juan Dolio resort or

11

Supreme Court of the Turks and Caicos Islands, Reasons for Decision dated April 20, 2009, (emphasis added) [D.E. 209-1, ¶ 24].

7
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 effectively operate the Cofresi resort.12 In obtaining such TROs, the Plaintiffs informed the Dominican court that the United States and the Turks and Caicos Islands entered a TRO and Injunction respectively, but never told the Dominican court that this Court allowed the U.S. TRO to expire and that the Turks and Caicos Islands' court discharged its ex parte Injunction.13 13. As a direct and proximate result of Plaintiffs' malicious ex parte

TROs, Banco Leon foreclosed on the Cofresi property and Banco de Reservas and Banco del Progresso have foreclosed on the Juan Dolio property. The Elliott Defendants are contesting the foreclosure of Cofresi in court while counsel for the Aguilar Plaintiffs (now dismissed) and the Hofmann Plaintiffs refused to voluntarily remove their wrongfully obtained TROs notwithstanding the Special Master's recommendations that these injunctions be removed. See Report and Recommendation in Accordance with the Court's Interim Order Following Hearing on Preliminary Injunction; Preliminarily Appointing Special Master at p. 6 [D.E. 438].

12

See Dominican Republic TRO (translation) at 23, 37, 43, and 51 [D.E. 617-13, 14] [D.E. 394-

2].
13

Id. 8

LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 II. Course of Proceedings And Dispositions in District Court and Statement of Facts 14. On March 3, 2009, Appellee/Plaintiff Klaus Hoffman ("Plaintiff")

filed an invective-laced 52 page complaint against Frederick and Derek Elliott (collectively, the "Elliotts") and their companies (collectively with the Elliotts, the "Elliott Defendants") and other defendants (collectively with the Elliott Defendants, the "Defendants")14 alleging violations of Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations, 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) ("RICO"), conspiracy to violate Federal RICO, Florida RICO, conspiracy to violate Florida RICO, breach of contract, unjust enrichment, fraud in the inducement, injunctive relief, equitable lien, constructive trust, accounting, and false and misleading advertising among other things. 15. On the same date, Plaintiff sought the entry of an injunction and the

appointment of a receiver [D.E. 2]. In response, all Defendants, including the Elliott Defendants, jointly filed Motions to dismiss the complaint on the basis of personal jurisdiction [D.E. 145], improper venue [D.E. 142], forum non conveniens
14

Not all of the Elliott Defendants have participated in this Appeal. Accordingly, for the avoidance of confusion, while reference herein to the "Elliott Defendants" must necessarily include the EMI Corporate Defendants, reference to the EMI Corporate Defendants does not include all Elliott Defendants.

9
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 [D.E. 140] and failure to state a RICO claim [D.E. 207]. 16. After holding successive hearings on April 1, 2, 9 and May 19, 2009,

the District Court entered its Interim Order Following Hearing on Preliminary Injunction; Preliminarily Appointing Special Master (the "Order Appointing Special Master") [D.E. 348] on May 22, 2009, pursuant to which the District Court appointed Thomas E. Scott as Special Master pursuant to a general and nonspecific reference to Rule 53 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure [D.E. 348].15 17. On July 7, 2009, the Plaintiffs filed their Joint Emergency Motion for

Order to Show Cause (the "Order to Show Cause") [D.E. 474] pursuant to which, among other things, the Plaintiffs sought an order to show cause why a receiver should not be appointed for the Elliott Corporate Defendants.

15

Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(a)(1) provides that a court may appoint a master only to: (A) perform duties consented to by the parties; (B) hold trial proceedings and make or recommend findings of fact on issues to be decided without a jury if the appointment is warranted by: (i) some exceptional condition; or (ii) the need to perform an accounting or resolve a difficult computation of damages; or (C) address pretrial and posttrial matters that cannot be effectively and timely addressed by an available district judge or magistrate judge of the district.

The District Court did not identify which subsection of Rule 53(a)(1) formed the basis for the Special Master's appointment, nor did it clarify under which statute the "Monitor" was appointed. See D.E. 348 at 9 and D.E. 528.

10
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 18. On July 9, 2009 the District Court conducted a hearing to consider the

Order to Show Cause. During the hearing, the Elliott Defendants argued that the District Court did not have authority to appoint a receiver in the Dominican Republic where the EMI Corporate Defendants' properties are located. A legal opinion to this effect was submitted to the Court by the Dominican law firm, Pellerano and Associates, Santo Domingo, which is considered one of the most respected law firms in the Dominican Republic [D.E. 515]. Nevertheless, the District Court instructed the Plaintiffs' counsel to prepare a draft "receivership" order with Special Master Thomas Scott. See July 9 Hr'g Tr., 74:2-6; 77:24-25; 78:1-9 [D.E. 492]. There is no question that the District Court was prepared to enter a receivership order, and that Plaintiffs' counsel had a hand in drafting such an order. 19. On July 14, 2009, the District Court conducted a further hearing on

the Order to Show Cause at which time the Elliott Defendants were faced with the threat of the District Court to appoint a receiver. However, upon arrival at the courtroom, Frederick Elliott,16 one of the two principals (the other being Derek
16

There is an issue as to the validity of any action taken by Frederick Elliott purporting to bind the corporate Elliott Defendants. Frederick Elliott does not have authority to bind the EMI Corporate Defendants as he is not an officer, director or authorized signatory of any EMI Corporate Defendant. There were no directors' or shareholders' resolutions authorizing 11

LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 Elliott) of the EMI Corporate Defendants, was pulled aside by Special Master Scott, who told Frederick that he had a "deal" for him. Special Master Scott presented Frederick with a draft of what came to be the One Page Memorandum which, prior to that time, had not been seen by the Elliotts or the Elliott Defendants' (then) counsel, Concepcion, Sexton & Martinez. 20. Special Master Scott insisted that the One Page Memorandum be

signed, or the alternative would be the immediate imposition of a receivership.17 Frederick, provided with scarcely little time to consider the draft Memorandum before the hearing, and faced with what he thought was a loss of total control of the corporate Elliott Defendants if he did not sign the Memorandum, felt that he had no choice but to sign the Memorandum which provides as follows: In accordance with a discussion between the Special Master and Frederick Elliott held prior to the hearing on July 14, 2009 at 5 p.m., Frederick Elliott and all Defendants companies, agrees (sic) as follows:
divestment of management. The Companies Ordinance of the Turks and Caicos Islands contains a complete code governing corporate liquidation (which applies to those EMI Corporate Defendants that are Turks and Caicos Islands corporations). Shareholder approval is required to initiate any such liquidation. Similar requirements apply in the Dominican Republic as well. It remains unclear to the EMI Corporate Defendants exactly what basis the District Court would have to impose a receivership absent the consent of the EMI Corporate Defendants. Moreover, any receivership order entered in the United States must be domesticated in the Dominican Republic pursuant to an "exquadra" which can be contested. See July 14 Hr'g Tr. 6:5-9; 9:1-9; 11:3-6[D.E. 521] 12
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

17

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 1. Frederick Elliott will provide strict, timely and detailed reporting to the Special Master regarding the status of: (a) all ongoing construction projects at the Juan Dolio and Cofresi properties; (b) any and all foreclosure or default proceedings and notices relating to any property owned by Elliott or the Defendants companies in the Dominican Republic; (c) any and all ongoing settlement negotiations with Banco del Progresso, Banreservas, Banco Leon or any other banking institution; 2. Frederick Elliott will provide immediate, full access to the Special Master, or those in his employ, to any and all financial records and assets, and the accounting thereof; 3. There will be no deterioration of any assets or encumbrances of assets or holdings (in any jurisdiction) without prior disclosure and approval of the Special Master and/or District Court; 4. No actions will be taken without the advice and consent of the Special Master; 5. The Special Master may liaison with the parties through the Dominican counsel; 6. Costs and fees of the Special Master are to be borne by the Elliott Defendants; 7. This procedure is approved in lieu of receivership; and 8. Elliott agrees that any failure to comply with the above conditions will result in the entry of
13
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 receivership by the District Court, upon the District Court's approval. In addition to the foregoing, after further negotiation between Frederick Elliott, counsel for the Hofmann and Aguilar Plaintiffs and Special Master Scott, the following two additional handwritten terms were added to the One Page Memorandum:

9. [Defendants] to drop all jurisdictional issues + FNC questions; and 10. This Memo does not reach the issues of judicial liens which will be considered on a case by case basis for removal. One Page Memorandum [DE 524-1]. 21. Importantly, it is quite clear in the One Page Memorandum that the

term "Monitor" is not even used. The term "Special Master" is used throughout. This is not surprising, as the term "Monitor" was never even discussed. Indeed, the word "Monitor" does not even appear in the transcript of the hearing on July 14, 2009. See D.E. 521]. 22. In any event, after the parties agreed to the terms of the One Page

Memorandum, Special Master Scott advised the District Court of the agreement and proposed:
14
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 MR. SCOTT: Maybe we can have each party initial the memo, at least for tonight, and then what I propose is that each side can submit within 24 hours a proposed order with this contemplated and then we will meet and confer and submit the order for your approval." July 14 Hr'g Tr. 26:24-25; 27:1-3 [D.E. 521] (emphasis added). 23. The parties did as Mr. Scott proposed and initialed the One Page

Memorandum. See D.E. 524-1. In furtherance of their understanding of the Special Master's proposal, the Elliott Defendants timely submitted their proposed order which simply tracked the language of the One Page Memorandum as was understood to be the basis for the Monitor Order which would be "in lieu of receivership." [D.E. 524-1 at ¶7].18 24. However, here is where the breakdown in the process occurred. There

never was a meet and confer, and the Elliotts were never presented with any form of the Monitor Order before its submission. 25. However, it is abundantly clear that the Plaintiffs submitted what was

to have been the order appointing receiver they had been previously tasked to draft by the District Court on July 9, 2009 with cosmetic changes to adopt the "monitor" nomenclature. The Special Master apparently submitted the Plaintiffs' version of

18

A true and correct copy of the Elliott Defendants' proposed order is included with the EMI Appellants' Record Excerpts. [D.E. 539-1] 15

LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 the Monitor Order to the District Court without providing an opportunity for comment and revision by the Elliott Defendants. Put differently, the Plaintiffs, who always wanted a receiver appointed, got precisely that with the name "monitor." 26. On July 17, 2009, the District Court entered its Order Following

Hearing on Plaintiffs' Joint Motion for Order to show cause [DE 474]; Appointing Monitor by Agreement of the Parties (the "Monitor Order") [D.E. 528] pursuant to which the District Court appointed Special Master Thomas Scott as "Monitor." 27. On July 27, 2009 the Elliott Defendants' then counsel, Concepcion,

Sexton & Martinez filed a motion for reconsideration (the "Motion for Reconsideration") of the Monitor Order, since it was not reflective of the One Page Memorandum [D.E. 539]. Although the District Court denied the Motion for Reconsideration [D.E. 696], for the purposes of this Appeal, there should be no question of waiver. Simply put, the Elliott Defendants did not agree to the Monitor Order and preserved their rights with respect to objecting to the Monitor Order by (1) filing the instant Appeal and (2) moving for reconsideration of the Monitor Order. 28. On August 14, 2009, within 30 days of the entry of the Monitor Order,

16
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 the EMI Corporate Defendants filed their Notice of Appeal [D.E. 623] with the District Court pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). 29. On or before December 2, 2009, the EMI Appellants (EMI Corporate

Defendants) filed their response to this Court's jurisdictional questions, pursuant to which the EMI Appellants responded that the basis for this Court's jurisdiction over this appeal is 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(2). III. Standard of Review 30. Appellate review of the district court's construction of the One Page

Memorandum and the allegedly "agreed" Monitor Order is de novo. See Reynolds v. Roberts, 202 F.3d 1303, 1313 (11th Cir. 2000) citing Jacksonville Branch, NAACP v. Duval County School Bd., 978 F.2d 1574, 1578 (11th Cir. 1992) (for purposes of enforcement, consent agreements are interpreted under the principles of contract law). See Jacksonville Branch, NAACP, 978 F.2d at 1578 citing United States v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 420 U.S. 223, 238 (1975); Paradise v. Prescott, 767 F.2d 1514, 1525 (11th Cir.1985), aff'd, 480 U.S. 149 (1987). "Agreed" orders are analogous to consent agreements, and are likewise interpreted under the principles of contract law. See City of Covington v. Covington Landing, Ltd. P'ship., 71 F.3d 1221, 1227 (6th Cir.1995) (a district court's interpretation of

17
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 agreed orders and consent decrees is subject to de novo review because they are contractual in nature and therefore governed by principles of contract interpretation). "An Agreed Order is a contract and its interpretation is governed by basic rules of contract construction." In re Delaney's II, Inc., 1991 WL 337625 at *2 (N.D.Ill. June 12, 1991) citing In re Continental Airlines Corp., 907 F.2d 1500, 1508 n. 6 (5th Cir.1990) (settlement agreement is an enforceable contract, the interpretation of which is reviewed de novo); Boatman v. Sullivan, 1990 WL 146699 (N.D.Ill. Oct. 1, 1990) (an agreed order is essentially a contract); In re 360 Inns, Ltd., 76 B.R. 573, 578 (Bankr.N.D.Tex.1987) ("agreed order is in the nature of a contract and is subject to the rules of construction of contracts"). SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT 31. At bottom, what is at issue in this appeal is whether the District Court

erred in entering the Monitor Order appointing Special Master Thomas E. Scott as Monitor where the Elliott Defendants did not review or agree to the terms of the purportedly "agreed" Monitor Order. The EMI Corporate Defendants respectfully submit that the District Court has, indeed, committed reversible error by imposing its imprimatur on an agreement that was never agreed to by the Elliott Defendants (which includes the EMI Corporate Defendants).

18
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 32. Usually, opposing parties negotiate the terms of an agreed order prior

to its submission to the court. Drafts will be exchanged, language massaged, but at the end of the day, an agreed order is nothing more than a contract to which a court affixes its imprimatur as an order. However, in this case, the Special Master failed to adhere to the very procedures he himself outlined to the District Court for a "meet and confer" whereby the language of the Monitor Order would have been negotiated. 33. As more fully described in the Argument, basic rules of contract

interpretation apply to agreed orders. By reference to the laws of contract, the Elliott Defendants did not have the requisite intent to enter into the Monitor Order, and as such, it cannot be a binding obligation of the Elliott Defendants. As such, it was reversible error for the District Court to enter the Monitor Order under such circumstances. ARGUMENT AND CITATIONS OF AUTHORITY I. The Agreed Order Must be Analyzed Pursuant to the Law of Contracts 34. At bottom the Monitor Order is purported to be an "agreed" Order.

As such, it is subject to review pursuant to the law of contracts. See City of Covington v. Covington Landing, Ltd. P'ship., 71 F.3d 1221, 1227 (6th Cir.1995)

19
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 (a district court's interpretation of agreed orders and consent decrees is subject to de novo review because they are contractual in nature and therefore governed by principles of contract interpretation). "An Agreed Order is a contract and its interpretation is governed by basic rules of contract construction." In re Delaney's II, Inc., 1991 WL 337625 at *2 (N.D.Ill. June 12, 1991). 35. When determining whether a contract is enforceable, courts look to

traditional notions of "offer" and "acceptance" and to basic contract law. Sands v. Wagner & Hunt, P.A., 2009 WL 2730469 at *2 (S.D.Fla. Aug. 28, 2009) ("Florida applies an 'objective test' to determine whether a contract, or a settlement, may be duly enforced) citing Robbie v. City of Miami, 469 So.2d 1384, 1385 (Fla.1985) ("The making of a contract depends not on the agreement of two minds in one intention, but on the agreement of two sets of external signs-not on the parties having meant the same thing but on their having said the same thing."); see also Schwartz v. Fla. Bd. of Regents, 807 F.2d 901, 905 (11th Cir.1987) ("The Court's role is to determine the intention of the parties from the language of the agreement, the apparent objects to be accomplished, other provisions in the agreement that cast light on the question, and the circumstances prevailing at the time of the agreement.").

20
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 36. The party seeking to enforce a settlement agreement bears the burden

of showing that the opposing party assented to the terms of the agreement. See Carroll v. Carroll, 532 So.2d 1109 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); Long Term Mgmt., Inc. v. Univ. Nursing Center, Inc., 704 So.2d 669, 673 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (noting that the party seeking to enforce a settlement agreement has the burden of establishing "a meeting of the minds or mutual reciprocal assent to a certain and definite position" and such a finding "must be supported by competent substantial evidence"). 37. A contract requires, at a minimum, an offer, acceptance and

consideration. See Nelson v. Target Corp., 2009 WL 2150893 at * 2 (M.D.Fla. July 13, 2009). An "offer" is "the manifestation of willingness to enter into a bargain, so made as to justify another person in understanding that his assent to that bargain is invited and will conclude it." Caley v. Gulfstream Aerospace Corp., 428 F.3d 1359, 1373 (11th Cir. 2005) citing Restatement (Second) of Contracts, § 24. 38. Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 26 on "preliminary negotiations"

is further instructive: A manifestation of willingness to enter into a bargain is not an offer if the person to whom it is addressed knows or has reason to know that
21
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 the person making it does not intend to conclude a bargain until he has made a further manifestation of assent. Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 26 (emphasis added). 39. Acceptance has been defined as the exercise of the power conferred

by the offer, by the performance of some other act or acts. See Elan Corp., PLC v. Andrx Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 272 F.Supp 2d. 1325, 1340 (S.D.Fla. 2002) rev'd on other grounds 366 F.3d 1336 (Fed.Cir. 2004) citing Corbin on Contracts § 1.11. 40. As described below, there was no "meeting of the minds" with respect

to agreement on the terms of the Monitor Order as entered. Indeed, the only agreement to which the EMI Corporate Defendants agreed is the One Page Memorandum, and is more accurately considered a "preliminary negotiation" because the parties considered the One Page Memorandum as the preliminary step of agreement prior to a "meet and confer" in which the parties would negotiate the terms of the Monitor Order. II. The EMI Corporate Defendants Did Not Agree to the Terms of the Monitor Order as Entered 41. The District Court breached the bounds of its authority by entering the

Monitor Order which deviates dramatically from the negotiated terms of the parties' One Page Memorandum. Case law on "consent decrees" is particularly

22
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 informative to the matter before this Court, as consent decrees, like agreed orders, are contractual in nature. See City of Covington v. Covington Landing, Ltd.

P'ship., 71 F.3d 1221, 1227 (6th Cir.1995) (agreed orders and consent decrees are contractual in nature and therefore governed by principles of contract interpretation). 42. Absent a trial, "it is the parties' agreement that serves as the source of

the court's authority to enter any judgment at all." Local Number 93, Int'l Ass'n of Firefighters, AFL-CIO v. City of Cleveland, 478 U.S. 501, 522 (1986) citing United States v. Ward Baking Co., 376 U.S. 327, 333-334 (1964) (a district court "may not enter a 'consent' judgment without the actual consent" of both parties to the entirety of the judgment). Accordingly, a district court lacks any "power . . . to modify a proposed consent decree and order its acceptance over either party's objection." Evans v. Jeff D., 475 U.S. 717, 727 (1986). The rule is simple: "Courts are not permitted to modify settlement terms or in any manner to rewrite the agreement reached by the parties." Holmes v. Continental Can Co., 706 F.2d 1144, 1160 (11th Cir. 1983). Accord Brooks v. Georgia State Bd. of Elections, 59 F.3d 1114, 1119 (11th Cir. 1995) (finding "no authority for the proposition that a federal court may modify the terms of a voluntary settlement agreement between parties

23
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 before a decree has been entered"); Cotton v. Hinton, 559 F.2d 1326, 1331-1332 (5th Cir. 1977). 43. However, by entering the Monitor Order in the absence of agreement

or consent on the part of the EMI Corporate Defendants, the District Court did, in effect, modify the terms of the voluntary settlement in this case – the One Page Memorandum. 44. Had the District Court signed the Elliott Defendants' proposed order,

or something bearing at least some resemblance to the One Page Memorandum, there may have been no basis for this Court to assert jurisdiction over this Appeal. However, the facts belie this assumption. Moreover, the EMI Appellants were not even given the opportunity to revise and edit the proposed Monitor Order before it was submitted to the Court. Thus, what has actually occurred as a result of the entry of the Monitor Order is a deprivation of the EMI Appellants' rights without due process. 45. Although this Court's decision in Reynolds v. Roberts, 202 F.3d 1303

(11th Cir. 2000) was primarily concerned with standing to challenge a consent decree, the very nature of the inquiry regarding standing is informative to the underlying merits of this Appeal. Specifically, this Court held in Reynolds that

24
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 As a general rule, '[a] party normally has no standing to appeal a judgment to which he or she consented.' . . . . There are exceptions to the general rule; one is that an appeal will lie if 'the judgment allegedly deviates from the terms of the parties' agreement.' Reynolds, 202 F.3d at 1312 (emphasis added, internal citations omitted). 46. In this case, the EMI Corporate Defendants allege that the Monitor

Order as drafted does not reflect (or even resemble) the parties' agreement in the One Page Memorandum. The One Page Memorandum, which was agreed to by the Elliott Defendants "deviated" into the 11 page Monitor Order which was simply not consented to by the EMI Corporate Defendants. 47. Proof of the deviation from the One Page Memorandum and the

Monitor Order is manifest, as it would defy logic to assert that agreement to the One Page Memorandum is tantamount to agreement to the Monitor Order, especially since the Special Master did not adhere to the procedures he himself outlined to the Court with respect to the process for drafting, negotiation and submission of the draft Monitor Order to the District Court for approval. 48. In any event, it was beyond the purview of the District Court to

simply replace the One Page Memorandum with the Monitor Order without the express agreement of the EMI Corporate Defendants, even if it thought the terms of the Monitor Order were an improvement over the One Page Memorandum. See
25
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 EEOC v. New York Times Co., 196 F.3d 72, 78 (2d Cir.1999) ("[A] court may not replace the terms of a consent decree with its own, no matter how much of an improvement it would make in effectuating the decree's goals." (quotation omitted)). 49. The best argument asserted by the Appellee to suggest consent on the

part of the Elliott Defendants to the Monitor Order is that "the appellants also agreed that the Memorandum was simply a blueprint for a more detailed order." Appellee's Response to Jurisdictional Questions (the "Appellee Jurisdictional Response") at 50. However, the Appellee attempts to prove too much with this argument. First, even if the parties understood that the One Page Memorandum would form the basis for an order to be submitted later, it is an enormous logical leap the Appellee asks the Court to take when it suggests that such an understanding translates into the Elliott Defendants' approval of any final order sight unseen. 50. Second, to the extent the One Page Memorandum constitutes

anything, it constitutes a "preliminary negotiation" as defined by the Restatement (Second) on Contracts § 26 because the Special Master and the Plaintiffs knew or had reason to know that the Elliott Defendants did not intend to agree to the

26
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 appointment of a Monitor on terms other than the One Page Memorandum unless the Elliott Defendants "further manifested their assent" by engaging in the process outlined by the Special Master at the hearing on July 9, 2009; namely, the "meet and confer." Specifically, the Special Master advised the Court: MR. SCOTT: Maybe we can have each party initial the memo, at least for tonight, and then what I propose is that each side can submit within 24 hours a proposed order with this contemplated and then we will meet and confer and submit the order for your approval." July 14 Hr'g Tr. 26:24-25; 27:1-3 [D.E. 521] (emphasis added). 51. As noted above, there was no "meet and confer" and no drafts of the

Monitor Order were exchanged by the parties. There was no ability to scrutinize and edit the "boilerplate" provisions in the Monitor Order, much less the additional substantive provisions included in the Monitor Order that were not even addressed by the parties in the One Page Memorandum. 52. This Court's decision in Reynolds v. Roberts, 202 F.3d 1303, 1313

(11th Cir. 2000) is particularly instructive. In that case, this Court was considering a consent decree which had a "no appeal" clause. The Reynolds Court analogized a consent decree to a contract. See Reynolds, 202 F.3d at 1312-13. Such an analogy is particularly apt in this case, because contractual concepts such as capacity or authority to bind a corporation (Frederick Elliott's authority to sign the One Page
27
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 Memorandum), duress (Frederick Elliott's feeling pressured by the Special Master to agree to the One Page Memorandum or face a receiver) and consideration are capable of application to the instant dispute.19 CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the EMI Corporate Defendants respectfully request that the Court (a) vacate the Monitor Order of July 17, 2009 or, in the alternative (b) restore the EMI Corporate Defendants' management which was displaced by the Monitor Order and (c) grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. Respectfully submitted: /s/James C. Moon James Moon, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 938211 Peter D. Russin, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 765902 MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 3000 Miami, Florida 33131 Phone: (305) 358-6363; Fax (305) 358-1221 Counsel for Appellants, EMI Resorts, Inc. et al.
The Elliott Defendants gave up jurisdictional and forum non conveniens arguments in the One Page Memorandum – the Plaintiffs gave up nothing, as the issue of the removal of judicial liens was specifically side-stepped by the One Page Memorandum. 28
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

19

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH TYPE-VOLUME LIMITATION, TYPEFACE REQUIREMENTS AND TYPE STYLE RQUIREMENTS 1. This Brief complies with the type-volume limitation of Fed.R.App.P.

32(a)(7)(B) because this Brief contains 5,421 words, excluding the parts of the brief exempted by Fed.R.App.P. 32(a)(7)(B)(iii). 2. This Brief complies with the typeface requirements of Fed.R.App.P. 32(a)(5)

and the type style requirements of Fed.R.App.P. 32(a)(6) because this Brief has been prepared in a proportionally spaced typeface using Microsoft Word 2000 in 14 point Times New Roman font. Dated: December 8, 2009 Miami, Florida

By: /s/James C. Moon James C. Moon Counsel for Appellants, EMI Resorts, Inc. et al.

29
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that the foregoing document is being served this 8th day of December, 2009 on all counsel of record on the attached Service List by U.S. mail.

/s/James C. Moon James C. Moon

30
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Hofmann v. EMI Resorts, Inc. et al. 09-14183 SERVICE LIST

Hilda Piloto, Esquire ARNSTEIN & LEHR, LLP 200 S. Biscayne Blvd. Suite 3600 Miami, Florida 33131 Counsel for Hofmann Appellee/Plaintiff Scott A. Burr, Esquire Carlos Concepción, Esquire CONCEPCIÓN, SEXTON & MARTINEZ 335 Alhambra Circle, Suite 1250 Coral Gables, Florida 33134 Counsel for Appellants Enrique De Marchena and De Marchena Kaluche & Asociados

31
LAW OFFICES OF MELAND RUSSIN & BUDWICK, P.A. 3000 WACHOVIA FINANCIAL CENTER, 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 • TELEPHONE (305) 358-6363

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful