BACK TO HOME PAGE

 

TAYLOR REESE AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

(305) 444-7331

 

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH

JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR

DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA

GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION

 

CASE NO.: 16-2007-CA-00575-MA

DIVISION: CV-C

 

NORTH FLORIDA SCHOLARSHIP ORGANIZATION, INC., a Florida

Not-For-Profit Corporation,

 

Plaintiff,

 

VS.

 

MISS FLORIDA SCHOLARSHIP PAGEANT, INC., a Florida corporation d/b/a

The Miss Florida Pageant; JENNIFER HERRINGTON; JACKSONVILLE

SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION, INC., a Florida Not-For-Profit

Corporation, VOYAGER INFO-SYSTEMS, a California

Business d/b/a VoyForums.com; and GLOBAL GUEST, d/b/a

AmazingForums.com, a Foreign Business,

 

Defendants.

____________________________________/

 

299 Alhambra Circle, Suite 223

Coral Gables, Florida

 

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

1:05 p.m. - 6:30 p.m.

 

DEPOSITION OF RICHARD WALKER

 

Taken on behalf of the Plaintiff before Mary G.

Stephenson, FPR and Notary Public in and for the

State of Florida at Large, pursuant to Notice of taking

Deposition.

 

APPEARANCES:

KEVIN S. SANDERS, ESQ.

817 WILLOW BRANCH AVENUE

JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA 32205

On behalf of the Plaintiff.

 

JACKSON LEWIS LLP

BY: DAVID E. BLOCK, ESQ.

ONE BISCAYNE TOWER, SUITE 3500

TWO SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD

MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131

On behalf of the Defendants.

 

 

I N D E X

 

WITNESS: DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS

RICHARD WALKER

BY MR. EVANS: 4

- - -

 

E X H I B I T S

- - -

Page

Plaintiff's Exhibit 1 17

Plaintiff's Exhibit 2 53

Plaintiff's Exhibit 3 88

Plaintiff's Exhibit 4 98

Plaintiff's Exhibit 5 115

Plaintiff's Exhibit 6 122

Plaintiff's Exhibit 7 126

Plaintiff's Exhibit 8 127

Plaintiff's Exhibit 9 133

Plaintiff's Exhibit 10 137

Plaintiff's Exhibit 11 139

Plaintiff's Exhibit 12 143

Plaintiff's Exhibit 13 145

Plaintiff's Exhibit 14 146

Plaintiff's Exhibit 15 149

Plaintiff's Exhibit 16 153

Plaintiff's Exhibit 17 154

Plaintiff's Exhibit 18 156

Plaintiff's Exhibit 19 157

Plaintiff's Exhibit 20 161

Plaintiff's Exhibit 21 163

Plaintiff's Exhibit 22 172

Plaintiff's Exhibit 23 194

 

Thereupon:

 

RICHARD WALKER,

was called as a witness and, having been first duly

sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

 

DIRECT EXAMINATION

 

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Walker. I'm Kevin

Sanders. You probably know me.

A. Yes.

Q. I'm taking your deposition today.

Have you ever had your deposition taken

before?

A. Yes, I have.

Q. What circumstances was that in?

A. Usually lawsuits involving the University

of Miami.

Q. Then you are at least, I guess, somewhat

familiar with a deposition. A deposition is just merely

a tool that the rules of civil procedure allow for

attorneys to use to do investigations, to have an

opportunity to ask questions, to proffer testimony, and

things like that. It's supposed to be a friendly

intercourse that goes back and forth, and with that in

mind, I am going to ask you questions.

If you understand it, please feel free to

answer it. If you don't understand it or if you are

confused and you would want for me to maybe try to

clarify it, I'll do my best that I can, but I'll need you

to tell me that so that I can do that for you.

A. Okay.

Q. Your attorney may make an objection. That

is his prerogative. He preserves the record on that, but

unless he instructs you not to answer, you will still

need to answer the question.

If you need to take a break, if you need to

pause for a minute, if you need to use the rest room,

whatever like that, again, either let me or your attorney

know and we will take a short break and then reconvene in

a few minutes and start back over again.

With that all in mind, we can get started.

For the sake of the record, could you state

your full and complete name?

A. James Richard Walker.

Q. We are allowed to ask some foundational

questions. I'm not prying into your personal life or

anything like that.

Where do you reside?

A. 362 Northeast 92nd Street, Miami Shores,

Florida.

Q. How long have you resided there?

A. Since June of 2006.

Q. Are you employed?

A. Yes.

Q. How are you employed?

A. I'm the assistant vice president for

student affairs at the University of Miami.

Q. How long have you been employed as such?

A. In this particular position, since June of

2003, but I have been employed at the University of Miami

since June of 1987.

Q. Did you say '87?

A. '87, 22 years.

Q. What is your relationship to the Miss

Florida Scholarship Pageant, Inc.?

A. I am the chairman of the board of

directors.

Q. What is a chairman of the board for the

Miss Florida pageant?

A. The chairman overseas the board meetings,

puts together the agenda for the board meetings,

facilitates the board meetings, also facilitates writing

franchise meetings when we have franchise meetings. That

is the general duties of the chairman.

I also in terms of some actual pageant

responsibilities, I oversee the production of the actual

Miss Florida pageant, meaning the show piece of the

pageant and work specifically with putting together the

program book for the pageant.

Q. How long have you been with the Miss

Florida Scholarship Pageant, Inc.?

A. Approximately June 2002.

Q. How did you become involved with it since

June 2002?

A. In June, the Miss America organization

approached Mary Sullivan about particularly taking over

the Miss Florida Scholarship Pageant. Mary, myself and

Rob Loy agreed to do so, and we formed a corporation, the

Miss Florida Scholarship Pageant Incorporated.

Q. Who is in charge of the corporation known

as Miss Florida Scholarship Pageant, Inc.?

A. Clarify who is in charge. Clarify the

question. The board of directors is responsible for the

oversight of the corporation.

Q. Thank you. Who is the board of directors

for the Miss Florida Scholarship Pageant Inc.?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Name the individuals?

The Miss Florida Scholarship Pageant, Inc.

board of directors consists of volunteers that

live throughout the State of Florida.

The current board members are, obviously,

myself, Mary Sullivan, Rob Loy, Keith Williams,

Dr. Patty Adeeb, David Gilbert, Shannon Rees, Mary

Demtrow. Norma Storms is a field director on the

board. Patti Bolding is a field director on the

board, and Lynn Dalton is a field director on the

board, and the other director Dana Dalton, judge.

I think I hit everybody.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Those are the current board of directors?

A. Ex officio members, too, Ray McLeod, who is

our in-house counsel for the board, and Wayne Dewitt, who

is our CPA.

Q. Is there more than one board of directors

for the Miss Florida Scholarship Pageant Inc.?

A. There is an overall board of directors and

then there is an executive board, which are the officers.

Q. Who is on the, I guess, executive board?

A. Myself, I'm the chairman. Mary Sullivan is

the president. Rob Loy is the vice president, and Keith

Williams is the secretary. I forgot Keith in the initial

essay. I am rattling these names off the top of my head.

Q. Do you have bylaws or any other written

document that sets out what the job duties and

responsibilities are of the board of directors for either

the full board that you mentioned or the executive board?

MR. BLOCK: Foundation.

THE WITNESS: There are bylaws. Quite

frankly, I don't have them memorized off the top

of my head.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Who has control of those bylaws?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Our attorney, Ray McLeod.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. If I were to tell you I took Ray's

deposition and he says he doesn't have any such?

A. They are in existence somewhere. He helped

draft them.

Q. But you wouldn't have them in your

possession?

A. I might, but if I do, it has been a long

time since I looked at them.

Q. How long would it be since you looked at

them?

A. Probably since they were originally

written.

Q. Would that be, I guess, in 2002 when you

all formed?

A. Approximately, uh-huh.

Q. So let me just ask you, have there been any

revisions to the bylaws since 2002?

A. I'm trying to recall. I think there may.

I know at one point there was a discussion. I can't

recall if we actually amended it. It had to do with

expanding the number of people to sit on the board.

I can't recall if we actually amended the

document or not. There was some discussion.

Q. Who would be in possession of any amended

bylaws or amended --

A. Again, I would have to look them up. I

would have to find them. Ray was the one who originally

drafted the bylaws.

Q. Do you know anybody that has a copy of the

bylaws?

A. Mary Sullivan might. I might somewhere,

but, again, like I said, it's not a document that I look

at everyday.

Q. Let me show you a document. I don't know

if you have seen it or not. It is Corporations Online

for the Miss Florida Scholarship Pageant. It was pulled

on 10/20 of 2006. Do you recognize that document?

A. Yes.

Q. Could you identify that for the benefit of

the record?

A. It's a copy of the Florida not-for-profit

filing with the Division of Corporations for the State of

Florida for the Miss Florida Scholarship Pageant

Incorporated.

Q. I note on this, it says the date filed, it

kind of matches. It says June of 2002. Do you see that?

I can point it out to you.

A. Yes, originally filed 2002.

Q. Does that refresh your recollection when

the corporation was formed?

A. That sounds correct.

Q. It says that the registered agent is Ray

McLeod?

A. Correct.

Q. What I'm interested in is that it says that

the officers are Mary Sullivan, James Walker and Robert

Loy?

A. Uh-huh.

Q. There are no other officers or directors of

the corporation. Do you know if Corporations Online have

been amended to include the names of all the individuals

that you earlier recited?

A. I don't know right off the top of my head.

Q. If that were to be done, whose

responsibility would it be to amend the corporation on an

annual renewal every year?

A. It would be between the registered agent,

between Ray McLeod probably in conversation with Mary

Sullivan, the president.

Q. Why would it be between Ray McLeod and Mary

Sullivan?

A. I'm just assuming. She would be the one

probably that he would contact in terms of making sure we

were ready to amend and file our annual report.

Q. Can we agree that at least in October of

2006 that the only directors of the corporation were Mary

Sullivan, James Walker and Robert Loy based on

corporations information online?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form, foundation.

THE WITNESS: I can tell you what is listed

in this document that you presented to me. It

lists three directors. I can tell you there were

more directors that were members of the board at

the time.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. You don't know if that would have been

updated with Corporations Online at that time?

A. All I can tell you is the document you

presented to me dated 10/20/06 has three directors

listed.

Q. Okay. Do you know if the current

documentation for the Miss Florida Scholarship Pageant,

Inc. would have all the other directors that you have

mentioned on it?

A. I would have to go review it to see what it

has.

Q. If it was to be amended at any point

between 2006 and 2009, Mary would have contacted Ray to

make that amendment?

A. Ray and Mary usually would talk about the

time to file the annual report.

Q. What, and I may get redundant with this,

but based on this filing of Corporations Online, what was

Mary Sullivan's or what -- yes. What was in 2006 Mary

Sullivan's responsibility to the Miss Florida Scholarship

Pageant, Inc.?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: She served as the executive

director and president.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. What is, I guess, the job description of

the executive director and president?

A. She pretty much handles kind of day-to-day

operations for the organization. She handles

communications directly with the Miss America

organization. She handle communications with the local

franchise holders. She handles communications with the

contestants. She also supervises and books Miss

Florida's appearances. So she is in constant contact

with the raining Miss Florida in connection with her

appearance schedule.

Q. What kind of latitude does she have to act

on behalf of the corporation without a board decision?

MR. BLOCK: Objection as to form.

THE WITNESS: If it's just daily routine

basic operations, she has the authority to act on

routine matters.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. How do you define basic operations as

opposed to other matters?

A. What I just talked about, day-to-day

communications, letters, e-mails, those kind of matters.

Q. I think you said with Miss America,

franchises and with contestants? Anything else?

A. Contestant communications. She would be

working with entities in terms of preparations for

upcoming annual pageant in terms of working with the

city, talking to hotels, talking to venues, those kind of

things in terms of day-to-day preparations.

Q. So she would be allowed to talk with hotels

and set up hotel accommodations?

A. Uh-huh.

Q. You have to say verbally yes or no. That

is one of those instructions I forgot to give you.

A. Sorry. Not a problem.

She has the authority to have conversations

with them about our upcoming pageant season.

Q. And venues. You said cities. What do you

mean by talking with cities?

A. For example, we currently hold our pageant

in the city of St. Petersburg. It's a partnership with

them. They help sponsor the pageant. So she is in

contact with the city's marketing department,

periodically meets with the mayor, chamber of commerce.

When it comes to executing contracts and

that kind of thing, that is when it has to be approved by

the board.

Q. But she has the power to negotiate all

those contracts?

A. Yes, she does.

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Then James E. Walker, that is you; is that

correct?

A. That is incorrect. It should be James R.

Q. James R. Okay. That is why I was

double-checking to make sure.

Back in 2006, was your job description any

different than it is now such as you just described

earlier?

A. With the Miss Florida pageant?

Q. Right.

A. It was the same.

Q. Then Rob Loy, Robert Loy, he is listed as a

director. What was his job description in 2006 and then

what is it today if it's different?

A. He was then and is today the vice president

of the pageant and he -- I don't recall exactly what his

job is, but I think it's fairly similar to that in 2006

as it is today with one slight change.

I do remember now. He works with

coordinating our judges. There is a judges' list

required to be a certified judge in the Miss Florida

pageant. He keeps track of those. An individual can

only judge so many pageants in a pageant season. So he

is the one that coordinates all that. He works with the

judges' list to make sure they are in compliance with

Miss America rules and regulations.

He also during the pageant, actually, he's

responsible for the oversight of the judges. He works

directly with selection of the judges in the pageant and

in pageant week he's in charge of all the hospitality and

getting them from point A to point B.

Currently, he's also the co-executive

director of our Miss Florida's Outstanding Teen.

Q. That would be the difference that you were

talking before. He wasn't co-director of Miss Florida's

Outstanding Teen before?

A. Not in 2006.

Q. Not in 2006. Okay.

MR. SANDERS: This is will be 1.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 1, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me show you a 2006 Miss Florida pageant

program book and ask you if you recognize that.

A. Yes, I do.

Q. Would that be a true and accurate copy of

the Miss Florida program book for 2006?

A. That is.

Q. I have paper clipped one section there and

I have actually made color copies of it. You had

mentioned a board of directors. Now, we have seen the

board of directors listed with corporate information.

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Is this the board of directors that you

were referring to when you first answered the question

who the board is?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: This is the board -- the book

you are showing me lists the board in 2006. The

ones I named are the current board members. There

have been some changes since 2006.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. But in 2006, that program book accurately

reflects what you believe was the board of directors at

the time?

A. Yes.

Q. Like I said, I made color copies of that

just because it was easier to make them in color than it

was in black and white.

Could you compare these to the book and

tell me if these accurately reflect what was in the book?

A. It does accurately reflect what was in the

book.

Q. Let me give you those to look at.

You have already described Mary Sullivan's

job. Anything additional that you need to add to that

that you can think of for 2006?
 

A. It's a general description.

Q. It does say executive director and

president?

A. Yes.

Q. Is that one and the same job or is there a

distinction between duties as executive director and

duties as president?

A. It's basically the same job. The president

is more reflective of the title in the corporate

documents. There is a president, vice president, et

cetera.

The executive director denotes the title

used predominantly by Miss America to designate the

person within the state that handles the day-to-day

operations.

Q. So is Mary Sullivan or the corporation

listed with Miss America as the executive director for

the Miss Florida franchise?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: Franchise listed with Miss

America is the Miss Florida Scholarship Pageant,

Incorporated. That is who holds the franchise for

Miss America with Mary Sullivan listed as the

executive director.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Okay. Do you know if Miss America has any

rules or regulations with regards to how a state

franchise is to be run, such as bylaws or franchise

agreement or whatever?

A. In terms of the how it is to be run?

Q. Right.

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I have never seen any of

their rules in writing other than you have to in

order to run the Miss Florida Scholarship Pageant

within the State of Florida under the Miss America

system, the corporation has to be awarded the

franchise directly from Miss America.

In terms of day-to-day operations how it is

corporately structured, to my knowledge I have not

seen any specific guidelines as required from Miss

America other than it has to be a corporation.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Have you actually seen the franchise

agreement?

A. I have seen the franchise agreement.

Q. Do you sign the franchise agreement or does

Mary sign to the franchise agreement?

A. Mary signs the franchise agreement.

Q. Where is that franchise agreement kept? Is

it sent back to Miss America?

A. Sent back to Miss America.

Q. Do you all keep a copy of it?

A. If we have a copy, Mary would have the

copy?

Q. Have you or Rob Loy ever signed the

franchise agreement with Miss America?

A. I don't recall. I know I signed an annual

report. I can't recall if I signed a franchise.

Q. Since we have got, in my opinion, several

different boards, has any of the other board members

listed in the exhibit before you, have they ever signed

the franchise agreement?

A. Not to my knowledge.

Q. Is it either one of the boards the one

which is the three listed with Tallahassee or the one

that is in the program book, do they have any say in the

execution of the franchise agreement with Miss America?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Yes. The organization has to

decide whether as a corporation we are applying

for that franchise. Those franchises are awarded

some on an annual basis, some every two years.

That is at Miss America's discretion.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Would that discussion with regards to a

Miss America franchise be held in a formal board meeting?

A. Either executive board meeting or probably

a formal board meeting. To my knowledge, since 2002,

there has never been an objection for us reapplying when

the franchise is due.

Q. Well, do you recall any particular

discussions either in 2006 or since with regards to

matters of the state franchise coming up before any board

of directors?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Myself, honestly, I don't

recall.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Are all minutes of the boards taken and

kept?

A. Yes.

Q. Who is responsible for that?

A. Keith Williams, the secretary.

Q. Where would he keep the minutes of those

meetings?

A. You would have to ask him exactly the

location where he keeps them in.

Q. I did ask him at his deposition and he said

they are not in his possession and he thought they were

in your possession.

A. They are not in my possession. They are in

his possession.

Q. Are you saying then that he --

A. He's the one that takes the minutes unless

he's absent and then someone else will take the minutes.

Q. So if Mr. Williams denied having the

minutes, would that be a false statement by him?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to the form.

THE WITNESS: No. I don't know that it's a

false statement.

I would assume as the secretary he should

have the minutes.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. If he doesn't have the minutes, who might

instead of him?

A. Mary might have a copy.

Q. You think Mary would have a copy. The

original should still be in Keith's possession?

A. Keith is the secretary. He takes the

minutes.

Q. Again, you are listed in the 2006 program

book as the CEO and chairman of the board?

A. Yes.

Q. You just mentioned earlier that you were

chairman of the board. Is there a difference between

those two jobs?

A. It's basically the same job.

Q. You had said executive director for Mary

Sullivan involved the franchise with Miss America and

president was more for the corporation.

Is that the same for your description?

Which would be CEO and which would be chairman as applied

to Miss America or to the corporation?

A. I think CEO is more just the daily working

title that we use, the general term of understanding.

The chairman of the board is also

officially on file with Miss America and it's also part

of the corporation.

Q. So you are listed as the CEO. Is your name

mentioned in the franchise agreement?

MR. BLOCK: Object to foundation.

THE WITNESS: I don't recall without seeing

the franchise agreement. I know the document in

the corporation is listed in the franchise

agreement.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. So you think CEO and chairman of the board

is in reference to the Miss Florida Scholarship Pageant?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: They are both titles for the

same position, basically.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. You have already described Rob Loy's job as

vice president. That is consistent.

Back in 2006 Kitty Potapow was on the board

according to the program book that we are looking at.

What was Kitty Potapow's responsibility as a board

member?

A. Kitty was also a vice president for two

primary functions. She was in charge of fund-raising and

sponsorship of the pageant and oversaw during pageant

week the actual housing of the contestants and the

chaperoning of the contestants.

Q. And other than those responsibilities,

what, if any, additional responsibilities did she have as

a board member?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I don't quite understand the

question.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. I guess I'm just trying -- other than the

responsibilities that you said that she was vice

president -- and let me ask it this way.

When you said she was in charge of

fund-raising and chaperoning housing --

A. Uh-huh.

Q. -- was that her responsibilities as a board

member or as a vice president?

A. Both.

Q. Now, I haven't asked this question so I am

going to backtrack a little bit.

In any of the bylaws that you have seen

since 2002, does it describe in those bylaws what duties

and responsibilities an executive director and president

has?

A. I would have to see the bylaws in order to

answer.

Q. So you have no independent recollection of

what the bylaws allow?

A. Right off the top of my head, I can't tell

you what is stated in the bylaws with regard to the

description without seeing the bylaws.

Q. What, if anything, do you recall in the

bylaws that describes the duties and responsibilities for

the CEO and chairman of the board?

A. Again, without seeing the actual copy of

the bylaws, I don't want to misspeak. I would have to

see the copy of the bylaws.

The general responsibilities are what I

already stated.

Q. These general responsibilities, do you know

if those are in the bylaws?

A. Again, I would have to see the actual

bylaws.

Q. Okay. So when you are running the

corporation and you are running the pageant, are you all

just running it from memory?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: We run it by the way we feel

we need to run.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Who determines how we need to run it?

A. Day-to-day operations as I indicated with

Mary Sullivan. We are usually in communication almost on

a daily basis if there are matters that need to be

discussed.

If there are matters that we feel the

executive board needs to weigh in on, then the executive

board will do so at their meetings and if there are

matters that require the full board action, then the full

board will discuss those matters at the meeting.

Q. The corporation -- I'm looking again at

Exhibit 1 -- it's a nonprofit, isn't it?

A. Correct.

Q. To your knowledge, are there any

requirements for the way a nonprofit runs itself that is

different from a profit in order to maintain its status

as a nonprofit?

MR. BLOCK: Form and foundation.

THE WITNESS: Basically, my understanding

is that we have to have a corporation. We have to

have a board of directors with a minimum of three

individuals required by the state. We do file on

an annual basis our tax return for a nonprofit

corporation, and technically a nonprofit

corporation needs to have at least one annual

board of directors meeting, and we have them more

frequently than that.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Is it your -- I'll ask it a different way.

If I can take your testimony that you

previously -- I mean, you basically run it the way you

run it. You don't run it by the bylaws. You run it the

way you either think the bylaws say or the way that you

remember them?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: To my knowledge, we run it

the way the corporation is structured with the

officers and members of the board of directors.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. But you haven't looked at the bylaws on how

the bylaws say to run it since 2002?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to foundation.

THE WITNESS: It has been awhile since I

looked at it, yes.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Do you know if anybody has looked at the

bylaws since 2002?

A. You would have to ask every one of these

individuals that question.

Q. But as far as you are concerned, you

haven't?

A. It has been awhile since I looked at the

bylaws. How long ago it has been, I cannot give you a

specific date.

Q. We talked about Keith Williams. He is

listed as the secretary/treasurer. Is he the secretary

and the treasurer for the Miss Florida Scholarship

Pageant, Inc.?

A. He officially is the secretary. He does

collect some funds in terms of relationship to ticket

sales, program book ads, our pageant store. Some of the

funds run through him. He handles the credit card

machines and those kinds of things.

Q. When you say he's officially the secretary,

does that mean he's not officially the treasurer?

A. I don't think he was ever officially

elected treasurer.

Q. Do you know why he is titled as the

treasurer in the 2006 program book?

A. No. Again, I'm assuming because he was

handling some of the cash operations.

Q. But he doesn't officially have that title.

Other than handling some of the cash operations, does he

handle all the cash operations?

A. Some. It just depends; checks, credit

cards, those kinds of submissions. It depends what the

event is. The gala ticket sales, he coordinates ticket

sales for the pageant. So all those funds usually come

in through him to be deposited in the bank. So he has

some functions as the treasurer. He does not write

checks on a daily basis.

Q. Who writes the checks?

A. Our checks require two signatures. We have

two checking accounts. One is for the operations

account. Those require two signatures; either myself,

Rob Loy, Mary Sullivan or Keith Williams I believe is

always a signatory on the account. So it requires two of

those to sign.

There is a second account for the

scholarships and we also have signatories on the

scholarship account, but I maintain the scholarship

account. I write those checks.

Q. There is one signature on the scholarship

account?

A. Two.

Q. Two?

A. Two different persons.

Q. Is anyone allowed to write checks outside

the four that you mentioned; yourself, Keith Williams,

Mary Sullivan and Rob Loy?

A. No, not to my knowledge.

Q. Patty Adeeb is listed as board member, but

it has underneath her scholarship chairman. What was and

is, if she is still with the board, Patty Adeeb's

responsibilities from 2006 forward?

A. She works directly with the contestants in

the submission of all documents required to administer

scholarships that the contestant has won as a result of

competing in the pageant. She overseas that entire

process. There's specific guidelines that the

contestants have to follow for submission to claim their

scholarship monies. She reviews all of the documents.

If everything is in line, then she indicates and

communicates to me that it has been approved and once

that is approved, then I actually send the check to the

contestant.

Q. So she does the paperwork and you

essentially sign off on it by sending the check?

A. Correct.

Q. Other than that job description, what, if

anything, does Patty Adeeb do either as scholarship

chairman or as a board of director?

A. Usually during pageant week, she is working

directly with the contestants in terms of hostess.

Sometimes she works directly with the reigning Miss

Florida to be a hostess for her making sure she gets from

one point to the other.

Q. When you say she is a hostess for Miss

Florida, she is sort of like a chaperone?

A. Yes. She serves as a chaperone for the

contestants of Miss Florida.

Q. Now, you have got, again, in the program

book Ray McLeod it says legal counsel as a board member.

Is he a board member?

A. He's an ex officio board member.

Q. Does it say he's an ex officio board member

on the piece of paper you handed me?

A. No.

Q. What would be Ray McLeod's, I guess, duties

or responsibility as an ex officio board member?

A. He consults with us on any legal matters.

He reviews all contracts before they are recommended to

the board and executed, and any other matters that we

think we need legal consultation on, he provides that

advice.

Q. Correct me if I'm wrong. Those all seem to

be legal responsibilities.

A. He does not have a vote on the board.

Q. Does he have any input into the board short

of the revision of contracts, the consult and the legal

advice?

A. He's typically present at board meetings.

He is free to have a voice, but he does not have a vote.

Q. You have Wayne Dewitt, and it's says CPA

underneath that as a board member. Is Wayne Dewitt a

board member?

A. He's an ex officio board member.

Q. It doesn't say ex officio there, does it?

A. It does not.

Q. What, if any, responsibilities does he have

as an ex officio board member?

A. He prepares our monthly financial

statements and presents them to the board. He also works

during pageant week typically with our pageant store in

terms of helping to assist with the store and the

operations of the store. He also files our taxes on an

annual basis.

Q. Is there a reason why Ray McLeod and Wayne

Dewitt are ex officio members and everybody else are

regular members of the board?

A. Because that is the way when we organized

it, neither one of them wanted to be voting members, but

we needed their services, an in-house counsel and a CPA,

and they also agreed to serve in an ex officio capacity.

It also allows them to -- by Miss America

rules, you cannot be a regular member of a board of

directors and judge local pageants. They both also had a

desire to judge local pageants, so by being ex officio

they are allowed to do that.

Q. Looking at the next page -- that is the

nine that is on the first page. The next page at the top

is Martha Dewitt. It says field director.

I'm sorry. Let me go back. I missed David

Gilbert. David Gilbert is down on the bottom, the last

one on the first page. I think you had mentioned him

when you first talked about a board.

A. Uh-huh.

Q. What is his duties and responsibilities to

the board and distinguish that from whatever his duties

might be as the state field director?

A. He is a voting member of the board of

directors, and field director is kind of a working title

that we use. They are the individuals throughout the

state that work directly in contact with each of the

local pageants. Each of the local pageants is assigned a

field director from the state board of directors, who

works with him in the operations of their pageant. They

are present during their pageant. They oversee the

pageant to make sure it follows the Miss America rules

and regulations with regard to judging. They work

directly, usually with the auditors, to make sure that

that process is handled in a fair manner.

Q. Is that Mr. Gilbert's responsibilities?

A. He also during state pageant week, works

directly with the judges, is a host with Mr. Loy, and

also works directly with the auditors during the state

pageant.

Q. Now, most of the job responsibilities, it

sounded like except for, I guess, working with the judges

and the auditors in the Miss Florida pageant, seem to

relate to being a field director. Does he have any

separate responsibilities to the board other than what he

does as a field director?

A. That is pretty much it.

Q. Now we will go to the next page.

Martha Dewitt. Again, she is related to

Wayne Dewitt?

A. Yes, she is.

Q. At the time in 2006, she was a field

director also?

A. That is correct.

Q. What, if anything, did she do as a field

director?

A. Again, same. She would oversee and work

directly with local title holders, local executive

directors in the execution of their pageants, help to

answer any questions they may have. If it's a new

pageant, she might help them set up and get organized

with the pageant. Again, works the day of the pageant to

be there to supervise and make sure that the rules and

regulations of the Miss Florida pageant are followed, and

also I believe in 2006, Martha also worked during pageant

week. Part of the week as a hostess with the contestants

and the other part of the week she oversaw what we call

our Sunshine Princess program.

Q. Is she still on the board of directors?

A. She has resigned.

Q. Why did she resign?

A. She cited personal reasons, that she

felt -- she retired from her business a couple of years

ago. She had a store in Tallahassee, wedding dresses,

prom gowns, that kind of stuff, and she wanted to spend

more time with her grand kids, wasn't feeling that she

was being too retired having to do all this pageant work.

I think she was also doing some work with her son and

daughter's company.

Q. What area did Martha Dewitt have?

A. Predominantly the northeastern part of the

state. I'm sorry, northwestern. She lives in the

Tallahassee area, so within that vicinity.

Q. Shannon Rees, she is listed in the 2006

program book as a board of director and also says field

director underneath her name.

I am going to let you tell me if her job

description is the same as you spoke of David Gilbert. I

notice there is field director on a bunch of these. I

don't need you to explain it again and again unless you

know that particular person does something additional.

A. She has the same responsibilities with the

others in 2006 as far as being a field director. Shannon

also was the person in charge of overseeing purchasing

merchandise for our pageant store. That is what she

does.

Currently, Shannon is no longer a field

director, is just a member of the board of directors, but

still overseas all of our merchandise operations.

Q. Norma Storms is listed as board member and

also a field director.

Just tell me what her job responsibilities

were in 2006 and forward as applies.

A. Same field director responsibilities

working with local pageants, and during pageant week she

also serves as a hostess with the contestants.

Q. What area did Norma Storms have?

A. In 2006, she would have predominantly

handled northeastern Florida. We have since kind of

not -- done away from designating regions per se. So now

Norma covers a little bit of northeast. She does some

work down here in South Florida, Palm Beach, Homestead.

She likes to travel, but predominantly most of the

pageant she supervises University of Florida, Gainesville

through Jacksonville.

Q. And other than what you described as her

responsibilities as a field director, does she have any

responsibilities to the board of directors?

A. She is a voting member. All field

directors are voting members of the board of directors.

Q. Then we have Patti Bolding.

She is listed as a board of director and

field director. What was her job description in 2006 and

forward as applies?

A. Same responsibilities as stated before for

field directors. Patti would also work with being a

hostess for the contestants during pageant week and

predominantly has pageants within the Orlando, Lakeland,

central Florida area.

Q. Is she still with the Miss Florida

Scholarship Pageant, Inc.?

A. Yes, she is.

Q. Next, we have me Linda Stevison.

It says public relations and media

chairman. She is listed on the pages for board of

directors. What was her job responsibility in 2006

forward?

A. Pretty much basically as stated. She

worked with media requests during pageant week

specifically was her main responsibility, sent notices

out about advertising the pageant on local media outlets,

requests for interviews, those kinds of things of

contestants was run through her. So she supervised the

media process during pageant week.

Q. Anything else?

A. She at the time was also a voting member of

the board of directors.

Q. Next, we have Tom -- well. Is she still

with the board?

A. No, she is not.

Q. And why did she leave?

A. She cited that she -- personal reasons.

She had gone back to school to work on a degree. Decided

timewise. Again, it's a volunteer organization, so --

Q. Next we have Tom Boyko, and it says just

director underneath his name.

A. Uh-huh.

Q. What responsibilities did Mr. Boyko have in

2006 and forward?

A. In 2006, he was a member of the board of

directors. He did not have specific responsibilities

other than he did work very closely with the two

co-directors for the Miss Florida's Outstanding Teen, and

then did just general things that needed to be done with

regard to the actual pageant, pageant operations.

Q. Anything else he did as a board member?

A. I know Tom did assist with getting

some fund-raising for the pageant as all board members

do. I can't recall any specific assignments. He was

kind of a generalist position. Where we needed help, he

was usually there to pitch in.

Q. Next is Kendal Jolly.

What, if any, responsibilities did he have

in 2006 and forward?

A. Kendal also worked very closely with two

co-executive directors for Outstanding Teen pageant, and

the production of that pageant, and was also a voting

member of the Miss Florida board, and also assisted in

more of a generalist kind of way in whatever needs to

occur during pageant week.

Q. Are Mr. Boyko and Mr. Jolly still on the

board?

A. No, they are not.

Q. Do you know why they left?

A. All I know is they resigned.

Q. Next is Keith Smith.

It says co-executive director MFOT. I'm

assuming MFOT stand for Miss Florida's Outstanding Teen.

A. That is correct.

Q. What, if any, duties or responsibilities

did he have on the board?

A. He was a voting board member of the Miss

Florida board of directors, and also was responsible with

Marc Caglia for overseeing and running the teen program,

the teen pageant, which is a separate pageant from the

actual Miss Florida pageant.

Q. Any other responsibilities to the Miss

Florida Scholarship Pageant board?

A. That is about it.

Q. You have listed a lot of job descriptions

in your testimony here today with regards to these two

pages from the 2006 book. Are any of these job

descriptions that you have given me listed in any of the

bylaws to the best of your knowledge?

A. To the best of my knowledge, no.

Q. Who are these individuals responsible to?

Who do they answer to? Who do they talk to? Who do they

contact? Who do they work things out with?

And if it's multiple people, let me know

who would do that.

If you want, I can go one by one if that is

easier for you or you can just give me a general

description.

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: It really depends on what the

issue or question is. Sometimes they would talk

directly to Mary. Occasionally, they might talk

to me. Sometimes they would talk to Rob. They

could be talking to Keith. So it really just

depends on what the particular -- if there is a

particular issue that that person has gone through

the litany of kind of whoever sees what, you know,

what that would entail.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me just ask a few specific questions

then.

A. Yes.

Q. Who does Mary Sullivan answer to?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: The board of directors.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. And is that the board of directors that is

in Exhibit 1 that is listed in Tallahassee or the board

of directors that we are looking at now from the 2006

program book?

MR. BLOCK: Same objection.

THE WITNESS: Currently, it's not the 2006

board of directors. It's not the current.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. I stand corrected. You are correct on

that. Let's just say in 2006, it was this board of

directors?

A. Correct.

Q. Who in 2006 did Richard Walker answer to?

A. The board of directors.

MR. BLOCK: Same objection.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me just ask you, I guess, a

supplemental question.

When the board was not meeting, who did

Mary answer to?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Generally, I think I

mentioned this earlier, day-to-day kind of

operations Mary and I usually are in communication

on daily basis. We discuss items, issues.

Sometimes she is in communication with Rob on a

daily basis, again, depending on what the issue is

if it falls under his jurisdiction. Sometimes

it's Keith depending on what the issue is.

Sometimes it's all four of us via e-mail depending

on what the issue is going on.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Depending on the issue, would the two of

you or the three of you or the four of you make decisions

for the corporation that might otherwise be a board of

director's decision?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: There are certain decisions

by practice, function of the operations that the

executive board would handle and then there's

other matters that will be taken to the full

board.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. What are the things that would be handled

by the full board as opposed to the executive board?

A. Again, it would depend. It would depend on

the matter. Typically, bigger items like, for example,

when we are setting, recommending, we, the executive

board on an annual basis just in terms of pageant

operations, the executive board would meet. We discuss

setting of ticket prices. That would then be

communicated to the full board and approved by the full

board.

If we are -- executive board would need to,

for example, sometimes we are looking at different hotel

options. In general, executive board would approve it.

We would discuss it. Sometimes we would send the matter

to the full board to get their input, what we might

decide to do.

Housing the contestants is a recent issue,

whether to house or not to house. There's some financial

decisions in this economy that people are trying to make.

Ultimately a decision would be made because it is a big

impact. That would be something we take to the full

board for discussion to get input because it has

financial implications on the organization, and it also

has implications on the contestants in terms of their

experience of the Miss Florida pageant. So, really, you

know, it depends on those kind of issues.

Q. Any other distinctions between full board

operations and executive board operations?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Again, franchises are

approved at the executive board level. Those are

reviewed at the executive board level and approved

at the executive board level.

Again, unless there is an issue that is

discussed or talked about at the executive board

of those who want more input, then we will take

any matters to get information and gather

information before awarding franchises to the full

board.

Again, contractual kinds of things, the

full board has the authority, or the executive

board has the authority to approve awarding

contracts every once in awhile, again, depending

on the nature. I mentioned hotels, housing

contestants, those kinds of things where there are

significant financial impact before making a final

decision. Many times we will take that and

discuss that with the board to get their input.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Is there anything in writing, bylaws,

rules, regulations which sets out what the full board can

do and what the executive board can do?

A. Not to my knowledge. We have just general

operating practices.

Q. Those are general operating practices based

on what?

A. Based on discussions of how we feel it's

best to run an organization, specially with the group of

volunteers that are scattered out all over the State of

Florida. So it's not like you have everybody sitting

here on a daily basis and have everybody in the office

and make decisions and discuss items. So from a

functioning perspective, it's easier for us to have more

regular discussions and conversations with a smaller

group of the executive board than it is to deal with

issues that need full board attention.

When we feel they need full board

attention, then they are placed on the agenda and brought

to the full board.

Q. Who makes the decision on whether something

is brought to the full board or not brought before the

full board?

A. Probably Mary and myself. Sometimes in

conversations with Ray if it has legal implication.

He'll weigh in and give us his opinion.

Q. Will you and Mary make a decision on

whether or not something should come before either the

executive board or the full board?

A. Yes.

Q. Are there things that you and Mary decide

that have never had to be brought up before the executive

board or the full board?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Seven years. Let me think.

Just, I mean, routine things like we will talk

about she is going to St. Petersburg to set up a

series of meetings and who she needs to be meeting

with, what needs to happen on this particular

trip, those type of conversations are not things

that we would necessarily take to the full

executive board, but conversations that she would

have in preparation for her going over to see the

mayor and meet with the chamber of commerce and

those kinds of things.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Does Mary have, I guess, the authority to,

I guess, negotiate with them and to come to, I guess,

some terms with either the mayor or with the, I think you

said the chamber of commerce or hotels and stuff like

that?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Yes. She has authority to

negotiate. Again, I stated earlier that when it

comes time to actually execute contracts, those

need to be approved by the executive board.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Do you have any examples of anything that

Mary has negotiated that the executive board or the full

board didn't approve?

MR. BLOCK : Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I'm trying to think.

One of them may be that she talked to the

chamber of commerce in St. Petersburg. They are

trying to work out some kind of financial

sponsorship contribution. That would not

necessarily require the board's approval because

Mary doesn't have the authority to say to the

board, you have to tell the chamber how much money

you are going to give us to sponsor that event,

but she would work out and say, if you negotiate

and give us a $10,000 sponsorship package, in

turn, we will provide you with a full page ad or

two full page ads in color, black and white. She

has those kinds of authority to do that from the

sponsorship perspective. It does not require like

the board's approval. She quite frequently does a

lot of fund-raising things that don't require the

board's approval in terms of who decides they are

going to give us 5,000 or 10,0000 or all those

kind of fund-raising efforts do not require board

approval. She is just reporting back to the board

on what is approved.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Is there anything in writing, rules,

regulations, bylaws or anything that you know of that

gives Mary that authority?

A. Just in general the day-to-day operations

of as I talked earlier about it being an executive

director, the day-to-day function of the organization.

There is nothing in writing that I'm aware of.

Q. You mentioned that you and her sometimes

make decisions of whether or not a matter comes before

the executive board or the full board.

Is there anything in writing that grants

you and Mary that authority over the board?

A. Just standard day-to-day operating

practice.

Q. That is just standard day-to-day operating

practice because you and Mary agree to that or you and

Mary and Rob agree to that or --

A. I think in general as the leadership of the

organization, you have day-to-day conversations about

whether things need official action, don't need official

action, and we together will make those determinations.

Q. When you say we, is it just you and Mary

then?

A. Typically. Every once in awhile we, Rob

and Keith will weigh in on the matter.

What I try to do in terms of kind of my

role as chairman is to decide when does something either

have an official vote, whether it's an executive board

vote or whether it's a full board vote, a full board

discussion. As part of my role I see as chairman is to

help guide and navigate and make those decisions if

something needs to be -- if I feel as the chairman needs

to be officially voted on in the records, the minutes,

then, you know, what I will say to Mary, I think we need

to discuss this with the executive board or we need to

take it to the full board.

Q. So, essentially, you, I guess, with Mary's

help, but you make the decisions and if you decide it

doesn't need to go before the full board, the executive

board, it's just a decision between you and Mary?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Sometimes that is what

happens and typically those things that happen

will be reported out during board meetings.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. From a percentage standpoint, seeing all

the decisions made throughout the course of one year, how

much of that percentage are decisions made by you or you

and Mary, and how many decisions are made by executive

board, and how many decisions are made by the full board?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: It's very difficult to

percentage out.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. From working with this since 2002, you

don't have maybe some idea of an average of how many

decisions were made by --

A. I would say --

MR. BLOCK: Form.

You have to let him finish the question.

I'm not even sure there is a question yet.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. The question is since 2002 through 2009,

you don't have in your mind an average of how many

decisions are made by Mary, how many decisions are made

by you and Mary, executive board and full board?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: It's just very hard to

answer.

Again, the kinds of things I have already

stated, directional issues, those kinds of things,

local franchise agreements, that would all be

executive board.

If you are asking me to guess at a

percentage, I'll guess. My guess would be

50 percent executive board, 25 percent Mary and I

discussion, and 25 percent full board. That is

total pulled out of a hat.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. I kind of got a little off track. Is Keith

Smith and Mark Caglia still with the board of directors?

A. No, they also resigned.

Q. Any reasons why?

A. I don't recall off the top of my head.

They sent in a letter of resignation.

MR. SANDERS: I will go ahead and make that

two pages Exhibit Number 2.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 2, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me show you what was introduced as

Number 17 in Mary Sullivan's deposition. It is a Miss

Florida executive board of directors meeting of

September 23, 2006. It says at the home of Mary

Sullivan, Miami, Florida. I ask you if you have ever

seen those minutes before.

A. Yes.

Q. We have talked about the board that was

listed with Tallahassee. We have talked about the full

board, and I think you mentioned an executive board.

Were the members of the executive board on September

23rd, 2006 Mary Sullivan, Richard Walker, Keith Williams

and Rob Loy?

A. Yes.

Q. Any other members of the executive board?

A. Kitty Potapow.

Q. So there were five board members for the

executive board?

A. Correct.

Q. Are there any rules, regulations or bylaws

with regards to the formation of an executive board?

A. Not to my knowledge. Well, other than it

states they are officers in the bylaws.

Q. Do you consider officers --

A. Officers of the executive board. Officers

are the executive board.

Q. Does it say in the bylaws that officers are

an executive board?

A. I don't recall.

Q. Again, if officers compose the executive

board, is it your opinion that the executive board has

more power than the full board of directors?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Ultimately, any full board of

directors has more power than an executive board.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. How has Miss Florida managed that, though?

Have the larger decisions been made by the

executive board or the larger decisions made by the full

board?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: Again, as previously stated,

it depends on the issue or the decision.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. And, again, I know you said that you might

be guessing, it was off the cuff, but you had said Mary

makes about 25 percent of the decisions or you and Mary

make about 25 percent of the decisions, full board makes

25 percent and executive board makes about 50. So the

executive board --

A. Once again you can split in thirds, too,

and I might be right. It's a crap shoot.

Q. Even if we did the thirds, approximately

two thirds of the decisions are being made outside of the

full board. Would you agree on that?

A. Ultimately in any corporation, a full board

of directors has more inherent authority than any

executive board.

Q. Is that the way Miss Florida has been

running its board, though?

A. If there had been some decision made by the

executive board and it was taken to the full board and

presented and discussed and the full board was in total

disagreement with whatever decision, the full board could

move to have the decision changed.

Q. But using your description of the full

board, wouldn't it be more apropos that a full board

review everything and then decide to relinquish authority

to either an executive board or to officers of the

corporation to make that decision?

MR. BLOCK: Form, argumentative.

THE WITNESS: Again, it's a volunteer

organization with board members scattered all over

the state. I think we have designed a structure

of operation that serves our day-to-day

operational purposes the best.

Whether you take offense to that or not is

your right to do so.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. And I haven't said anything about taking

offense to anything. I'm just trying to figure out how

you run the Miss Florida Scholarship Pageant, Inc..

MR. BLOCK: Objection to characterization,

form.

THE WITNESS: And I have answered the

question.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Okay. If you look at the second page, it

says, I guess the very last entry says that Jacksonville

franchise, it says, "Tabled - pending discussion and

input from full board in October and possible discussion

with Kevin Sanders."

Who made that entry or how did that entry

come to be in the minutes of the executive board meeting

of September 23rd, 2006?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: These minutes were taken by

Keith Williams. So he would have entered that

notation, but that was the decision at the

executive board meeting that we would not act on

that particular franchise request, and we would

seek input from the full board in the October

meeting.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. I guess the question is why did the

executive board not act on that franchise, and what was

discussed, and why was it deferred to the full board?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: Because there had been an

issue of concern that was posted to the Miss

Jacksonville pageant website regarding the pageant

being canceled, and so at that point in time, we

decided given the fact that this had been posted

that the pageant was canceled, that was the

pageant that -- previously, the franchise had been

held by the Miss Florida Scholarship Organization,

and so we decided at that point in time that we

should, given the circumstances of the fact that

it was posted on the website, we were not notified

that the pageant was going to be canceled, that

before this franchise was acted upon by the board,

that we need full and broad discussion from the

board.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. What rule or regulation or bylaw indicates

that a franchise can't cancel its pageant without notice

to the Miss Florida board or officers?

A. An organization has the right to cancel a

pageant or franchise, but we had not even yet awarded the

franchise officially to the Miss North Florida

Scholarship Organization.

Yes, a franchise had been submitted

indicating that there was a desire to have a pageant.

The date have been set. My understanding was

contestants, individuals had applied to be contestants

and then this appeared on the website.

Q. How did you come to the understanding that

people had submitted applications to participate in the

pageant?

A. Because on the posting on the website it

indicated that there -- if I remember it correctly was

that there had been some people that had entered but not

enough.

Q. Again, I'm not quite sure you answered the

question directly, but is there a rule or a regulation

governing franchises that says they can't cancel a

pageant when they don't have enough contestants?

A. Sure. There is nothing that says you

cannot cancel a pageant if you don't have contestants.

However, you know, when you are part of a larger

organizational structure, I think the common courtesy

would be to notify the organization which you are a part

of and say, look, we are having a problem getting

contestants, we can't get enough, we think it will be in

our best interest not to try to hold this pageant, rather

than posting a thing on the website and then Mss Florida

pageant starts getting contacted where individuals think

that now this pageant is being canceled.

Q. So it's a matter of common courtesy, not a

rule or regulation or anything?

A. I would agree with that.

Q. This rule of common courtesy was the reason

why the executive board then decided to postpone awarding

the franchise to defer to the full board?

A. If I remember correctly, and this has been

awhile ago. I'm getting old, older. There also had been

another franchise that had been submitted with regard to

the Miss Jacksonville pageant.

Q. It doesn't say that.

A. No, it doesn't.

Q. Does it?

A. No, it doesn't, but there were two requests

on the table if I remember correctly.

Q. What was the intended discussion with the

full board with regards to this franchise?

Was it the fact that common courtesy wasn't

employed or what was the intent to discuss with the full

board when it was deferred to the full board?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: If my memory serves me

correct, the concern was the message that got

posted to the board basically said, paraphrasing,

that Miss North Florida Scholarship Organization

would not be sponsoring the pageant this year.

That Cammie had decided not to be involved in this

program any more. Therefore, they were not going

to be holding the pageant. Paraphrasing again, it

didn't reference contestants, concern for the

number of contestants. Again, the manner, and

then it said -- so the manner in which that

particular issue was handled was of concern to the

board, to the executive board, and the fact that

now we had another franchise in front of us. So

now we had a predicament because we now had two

people requesting to hold the pageant.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Those are the only reasons that you can

recall?

A. Because of the volatile nature of just the

way this all transpired was of concern to the executive

board.

Q. Well, describe to me this volatile nature

of the way it all transpired.

A. Just the actual posting on the website in

terms of one day the website is up saying, we are having

a pageant, here is how you become a part of the pageant,

et cetera. The next thing we know this posting is up.

Kevin and Cammie are going to get out of the pageant, we

are not going to do this any more, et cetera.

Again, I think there was just concern in

general of how that was handled and also the fact that we

now had franchises in front of us that we felt, things

the board felt it should be a matter of the whole board

should plan.

Q. Has any other franchise canceled their

pageant without notifying the Miss Florida pageant and

still receive their franchise?

A. Canceled their pageant and still receive

their franchise?

Q. Well, canceled, rescheduled or whatever

their pageant.

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: To my knowledge, others when

they have canceled their pageant particularly

notified the Miss Florida pageant before canceling

the pageant.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. But there have been some that haven't?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I do not recall.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. So your testimony is today you don't recall

if somebody may have postponed or canceled a pageant and

still retained the franchise?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I'm thinking back. The only

one instance I can think of is Miss Orlando and if

I recall the circumstances, they submitted a

franchise. They paid the fee and then they

decided they did not want to hold the pageant and

if I recall the discussion from the board was we

couldn't guarantee them their pageant for the

following year.

Basically, they were requesting to say we

don't want to lose the name of the pageant.

Therefore, we are going to pay this franchise fee

and award the franchise, so we want to secure the

pageant. We don't want to lose the title, and if

I remember, they were told that that cannot be a

guarantee. That if someone else came forward and

wanted to run Miss Orlando then the board would

have to take that into consideration.

That is the only one I can think of the way

your question has come.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Now I'm looking at this and it says, "And

possible discussion with Kevin Sanders." What was the

intended discussion with Kevin Sanders that you can

recall from the executive board meeting?

MR. BLOCK: Again, objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Depending on how the

discussion with the board went, would be

determining whether or not we made a decision that

we wanted to talk with you in person.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Again, since I'm acting as attorney --

A. With Kevin Sanders. I'm sorry.

Q. So that was just a tentative discussion

with Kevin Sanders?

A. Correct.

Q. That was pending discussion with the full

board?

A. Correct.

Q. Did anyone that you know of send Kevin

Sanders a copy of these minutes or inform Kevin Sanders

of the executive board's decision at that time?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: Not to my knowledge, not that

I recollect.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. If Kevin Sanders was under the impression

that the franchise was going to be awarded and was

setting up a pageant for later on, what safeguards does

Miss Florida have in place to insure that a pageant that

may not be awarded a franchise doesn't spin its wheels

and expend money and costs that are unnecessary if they

are not awarded the franchise?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I am not sure exactly what

you are getting at, but at this point in time on

September 23rd of 2006, the Miss Florida pageant

had not executed a franchise with Kevin Sanders to

actually hold that.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Again, you don't execute a lot of the

franchises with other pageants but they still go on

planning their pageants assuming that the franchise is

going to be executed; do they not?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form, foundation.

THE WITNESS: Franchises are granted on a

year to year basis and people have to apply for

their franchise on an annual basis.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. But franchises are generally automatically

renewed; are they not?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Again, they are acted on on

an annual basis.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. But they are usually automatically renewed

for the holder of the franchise or when they resubmit for

the franchise?

MR. BLOCK: Object to the form.

THE WITNESS: Typically, that is probably

the case unless there is some issue of concern

that has arisen over the course of the last year

that would require a different decision.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. In fact, there are several franchise

holders that have been renewed ten years in a row, 15

years in a row, 20 years in a row; am I correct?

A. I can only speak for the last seven years.

Yes, there are some who are routinely for

the last seven years renewed.

Q. Do you know any that were in place prior to

you and Mary and Rob and whoever else that is a board

member took over the franchise?

A. I can only -- can you repeat that for me?

I am sorry.

Q. Let me just cite some examples. Bob Clark,

Tampa pageant, how long has he been around? Do you know?

A. He has been around longer than 2002.

Q. Do you know how long he has been around?

A. I do not know the number of years.

Q. Ruth Sidbury, how long has she been around?

A. Longer than since 2002.

Q. Would you know how many years she has been

around?

A. Not in total, no.

Q. Do you know of any other executive

directors that have pretty much had a franchise renewed

every year even before you took over the pageant?

A. I am trying to think. The two you just

mentioned, Bob Clark and Ruth, are probably two of our

long standing directors way before my time on the board.

Barbara Gyseberg, Miss Palm Beach County

would be another one that has been probably over

30 years. We can go up the coast. Those are probably

the three longest that are currently.

Q. To your knowledge, has Ruth Sidbury ever

been without a Miss Florida franchise?

A. Define ever been without.

Q. Since you have been involved in the state

system. I know you were involved in the state system

prior to being part of the corporation that now runs the

state pageant.

Since your involvement, has she ever been

without a franchise?

A. I do not know. It's possible. I don't

have her record, track record memorized.

Q. Are you familiar with history of Ruth when

Patty Adeeb accused her of using the N word to describe

black contestants in a local --

MR. BLOCK: Objection to foundation.

THE WITNESS: I am aware there was an

allegation. I do not know any specifics regarding

that situation.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Do you know if Ruth Sidbury ever lost her

franchise or any franchise because of the accusations at

that time?

A. Again, I am not certain of that.

Q. Do you know or do you recall that it was

Patty Adeeb who made those accusations against Ruth

Sidbury?

A. Again, I just knew there was an allegation.

I don't recall if I remember it was Patty Adeeb or not,

but I don't know the specifics of that situation.

Q. Would you consider using the N word to

describe black contestants in a pageant something

significant enough that this executive board should take

into consideration before awarding a franchise?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: I personally -- if you are

asking me personally, personally I would find the

use of the N word offensive.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. As a board member, would your personal

feelings influence how you would discuss the matter in

regards to determining whether or not an alleged

executive director would receive a franchise or renew a

franchise?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: If this alleged incident

occurred, obviously, part of what I would consider

personally would be if it did occur, what was the

outcome of the situation and how it was resolved,

and that to me also would weigh in on any

decisions that I might make with regard to this.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. So you would want to, I guess, sit down and

discuss with Ruth Sidbury or however had been accused of

doing something to find out their side of the story

before you made a decision?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: Personally, I would like to

have some information if someone could provide it.

It doesn't mean I have to personally sit down with

her, but in terms of the outcome of the situation.

Again, I wasn't directly involved in the

allegation, so I have no specific --

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. While we are on Ruth, what are the

franchise holder's responsibility to Miss Florida with

regards to their accounts and their fund-raising and

their scholarships?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: The actual accounts with

regard to a local pageant are the responsibility

of the local pageant and that corporation holds

that responsibility financially.

The franchise agreement indicates that the

local corporation must at a minimum award a $500

scholarship to their winner, must be able to

maintain that scholarship payment. They must have

scholarship rules as far as their contestant's

contract that says how those scholarships will be

awarded, and what is the procedure for a

contestant claiming those obligations. So they

have to financially do that.

They also must submit on an annual -- it

used to be quarterly, now it's been semi-annual.

I think they went to annual scholarship report,

indicating what scholarships have been awarded

within the past year and any scholarships that are

pending and still have not been claimed by the

contestants. They are required to submit an

annual report regarding that scholarship function.

MR. BLOCK: I have to feed the meter at

2:00 o'clock and I have to find quarters.

We are getting close. I mean, 3:00

o'clock, because it will be two hours.

You want to wait a few more questions or

you want to take a break now?

MR. SANDERS: Whatever you want. I can do

a few more questions or you want to break now. I

just don't know when you are --

MR. BLOCK: I just don't want to get a

ticket.

MR. SANDERS: Let me maybe just complete

this thought with Ruth.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Did you know that Ruth Sidbury or, I guess,

the Miss Jacksonville franchise was with Ruth Sidbury at

one point in time?

A. Yes.

Q. And you know that Kevin and Cammie worked

with Ruth Sidbury during that time?

A. Yes, I know that.

Q. Do you know that the Miss Jacksonville

franchise was at one point awarded to Kevin and Cammie

Sanders and taken away from Ruth Sidbury?

A. Yes. The Miss Jacksonville pageant

franchise was awarded to a different corporation other

than the corporation that Ruth was involved, which I

believe was Miss Jacksonville Scholarship Foundation.

Q. How did that happen? What was the thinking

behind that?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to foundation.

THE WITNESS: You are testing my memory.

If I will recall, a similar situation. We had two

franchises presented for the same pageant. One

for the Miss North Florida Scholarship

Organization, which the executive directors were

listed as Kevin and Cammie Sanders, and one by

Ruth Sidbury from the Miss Jacksonville

Scholarship Foundation.

And the decision was made by the board at

that time to award it to Kevin and Cammie.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Do you recall why it was awarded to Kevin

add Cammie over Ruth Sidbury who had had the franchise

significant length of time prior to that?

A. You are testing my memory. In 2002,

2003 -- I'm thinking out loud. I'm not responding. I'm

thinking out loud.

MR. BLOCK: She records if you think out

loud.

THE WITNESS: Sorry about that.

I don't recall the actual final discussion

in details. I truthfully do not.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. That is an answer.

Ruth was awarded a franchise, though. She

went with River City Jacksonville pageant?

A. Correct, she was.

Q. At any point in time, did Mary Sullivan

indicate to you or to the executive board the reason why

the Miss Jacksonville pageant was being awarded to a

different organization under Cammie and Kevin Sanders was

because Ruth Sidbury never provided any financial

information to her current board?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I recall, now that you said

that, I recall there was some conversation about

why Kevin and Cammie felt it necessary to form a

separate corporation. Again, the details of that

conversation, I do not know, but I knew there were

some issues that were brought to us by Kevin and

Cammie regarding the operations of Ruth's

corporation.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Do you know if any of those financial

concerns have ever been investigated by the Miss Florida

organization or have otherwise been resolved by Ruth's

organization, which is the Jacksonville Scholarship

Foundation?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to foundation.

THE WITNESS: Right off the top of my head,

I couldn't tell you.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. As you know, I have been taking a lot of

depositions in this case. We took the deposition of Ruth

Sidbury. Ruth Sidbury acknowledged under oath in her

deposition that she has never provided a financial

accounting to any of her boards since she has been

running her franchise. If what I am saying to you is

true, and, of course, the record speaks for itself, would

that cause you, first, any surprises?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to the form.

THE WITNESS: Again, in terms of the

structure of how a local pageant board operates

and functions would be the right and privilege of

that board to operate and function.

The Miss Florida organization would not

intervene and tell a local corporation running a

local pageant how they should function as a

corporation.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. The financial status of the company, Miss

Florida has no interest in?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: What Miss Florida has an

interest in is the annual reporting that it must

meet. At the time, I think it was semi-annually.

It was quarterly as I mentioned. Now it's annual

reporting of the scholarship account balances and

the money owed to contestants.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. So maybe you already answered this

question, but I'm going to ask it anyway.

Would you as an executive board member or

as the CEO and chairman of the board have concerns with a

franchise holder that does not account for where the

money comes and goes?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: Again, unless it's

specifically related to the payment of the

required $500 scholarship or any other scholarship

that they were awarding in the day-to-day

operations, et cetera, within how that corporation

operates would be between its board of directors.

MR. BLOCK: Okay. I have to ask for the

break now because I'm going to get a ticket.

(Recess taken.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Back to the minutes of September 23rd, do

you or do you not recall what the discussion was

regarding the North Florida Scholarship Organization, the

Miss Jacksonville franchise, Kevin Sanders or whatever

was discussed that made that franchise be tabled?

A. Again, as I previously stated, it had to do

with the posting to the Miss Jacksonville's website that

the pageant was being canceled.

Q. That is strictly it?

A. That and the fact that now there were two

franchises applied for for the Miss Jacksonville pageant.

Q. But, again, those minutes don't reflect

that?

A. No.

Q. Did you ever actually see the Miss

Jacksonville website or are you describing something that

was printed or copied to you or otherwise sent to you?

A. I saw the Miss Jacksonville website.

Q. Do you recall when you saw the Miss

Jacksonville website?

A. No, I don't recall the date right off the

top of my head.

Q. Do you recall how long the website had the

things that I think you paraphrased up on it.

A. No, I don't recall how long it was up.

Q. Have you been able to think of any rule or

regulation or bylaw or anything that requires franchises

so give notice first to Miss Florida before canceling a

pageant?

A. Nothing that I can think of right off the

top of my head that specifically states that, but it

would say, I think the franchise indicates that by

awarding of the franchise, the organization agrees to

have a contestant enter the Miss Florida pageant. So,

obviously, canceling the pageant, you would not be

submitting a contestant to the pageant. The language

something along that line.

Q. That is an interesting comment. Was it

your understanding on September 23rd, 2006 that the

pageant had been totally canceled and was not going

forward?

A. Again dates are all -- I don't know. It is

a long time ago.

Q. Let me ask it a different way.

If it was your opinion that the Miss

Jacksonville pageant had been totally canceled and hadn't

been rescheduled, would there be any purpose to tabling

the discussion with regards to the North Florida

Scholarship Organization's request for the franchise?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Again, you are asking me a

hypothetical. If the pageant had not been

canceled, you are saying everything was moving

forward as scheduled, then there probably would

have been no calls.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. It wasn't really a hypothetical the way I

asked it. I was, I guess, arguing the point backwards.

My first question was: Did you recall

whether or not the pageant was totally canceled never to

be rescheduled, and you said you didn't recall.

And so my next question then was: Well,

would there have been any reason to have postponed making

decision on the franchise if it was your understanding on

September 23rd that there was never going to be a

pageant?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form,

characterization.

THE WITNESS: Let me go back to what I

recall being posted to the website. That the

pageant was being canceled, that Cammie wanted no

more involvement with the program, that Kevin and

Cammie had enjoyed being a part of the system but

were no longer going to be part of the system and

were not going to be running the pageant any

longer. There was a comment, statement something

to the effect that there were individuals who

still had scholarship money pending. Contact

Kevin Sanders regarding those scholarships, and

there was a reference, as I recall, in the posting

that Jennifer and/or Jeff Herrington had expressed

some interest in taking over the pageant. It

clearly implied that Kevin and Cammie were not

interested in the pageant, and were not going to

have the pageant.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Now, a couple of things I need to ask you

on it because your memory seemed to be a little better

the second time than the first time.

The first question is: Do you know who

posted that on the website?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I do not know personally who

posted on the website. It was signed at the

bottom Kevin Sanders.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. If it was posted on the website, I think

you basically said if you have scholarship, contact Kevin

Sanders, would that imply that the North Florida

Scholarship Organization continued to exist and was being

run?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: There was no indication that

the Miss Florida Scholarship Incorporated

corporation was being dissolved. It doesn't state

that. It simply stated that they there would not

be a Miss Jacksonville pageant and that Kevin and

Cammie Sanders were no longer going to be

involved.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Now, aren't the franchises awarded to the

organizations.

A. They are awarded to organizations with an

executive director specified in the organization.

Q. So they are not awarded to Ruth Sidbury or

to Bob Clark. They are awarded to the organizations that

may be either run by Ruth Sidbury or Bob Clark; is that

correct?

A. They are awarded to the organization or

corporation with a specific person specified to be the

executive director.

Q. And so you acknowledge that the

organization at least as far as the website was concerned

had not dissolved itself, it still existed?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to the form and

foundation.

THE WITNESS: To my knowledge, the

organization existed.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. On September 23rd, 2006, had Mary Sullivan

indicated to you or any of the other executive board

members any discussions that she had had either with

Kevin Sanders, Ray McLeod or both Kevin Sanders and Ray

McLeod?

MR. BLOCK: Same objection, form.

THE WITNESS: To my recollection, she

indicated there had been a conversation on the

telephone with Kevin Sanders, Mary Sullivan and

Ray McLeod regarding the situation which had

occurred in the cancellation of the pageant.

She indicated that Kevin Sanders had

expressed that he may want to go ahead in holding

the Miss Jacksonville pageant without Cammie. She

indicated that in the conversation, Kevin was

instructed to submit a franchise that would be

reviewed by the executive board.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Anything else?

A. That is my recollection of the gist of the

conversation.

Q. Did she provide to you or the executive

board any e-mails sent between her, Ray McLeod and Kevin

Sanders with regards to the franchise?

A. I do recall I think that she indicated that

she had followed up that phone conversation with an

e-mail. I do not recall if I actually at that point on

September 23rd had seen the e-mail indicating that the

conversation had occurred, and that she had instructed

Kevin to submit the franchise.

Q. Based on your description of her powers and

authority, did she have the power and authority to enter

into that discussion with Ray McLeod, Kevin Sanders with

regards to the franchise?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: She has the authority to have

a discussion with anybody who is interested in

submitting a franchise, to discuss the process for

submitting the franchise. She does not have

authority to grant approval of the franchise.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. She has authority to discuss terms and

conditions with regards to granting of the franchise?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Terms and conditions of a

franchise are spelled out in the franchise. Those

are the terms and conditions that anybody, they

are all the same standard terms and conditions for

any franchise holder.

In terms of she only has the authority to

tell the process, talk about what is involved in

running a pageant, submit the process, the

paperwork. The executive board has the authority

to actually grant the franchise.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Well, now, are the terms and conditions of

granting the franchise in the franchise agreement itself?

A. When you say the terms and conditions of

granting a franchise --

Q. I am just repeating what I thought was your

statement. I thought I asked if Mary Sullivan had the

authority to talk about terms and conditions of granting

a franchise and I think your statement was that the terms

and conditions of granting the franchise are within the

franchise agreement.

A. No. I didn't mean terms and conditions.

The terms of a franchise. In other words, obligations

from the Miss Florida pageant to the franchise holder,

obligation of the franchise holder to the Miss Florida

pageant is what I was referring to.

Q. Is there anything in the franchise

agreement which would indicate the basis upon which a

franchise is either granted or denied?

A. There is nothing specific in terms of what

is reviewed and determined that is spelled out in the

franchise, no.

Q. Is there anything in writing, bylaws,

rules, regulations or anything with regards to the

procedure for granting or denying a franchise?

A. Not in writing that I am aware of.

Q. How is a franchise either granted or denied

then, and how did that come into being?

A. It's general operating practice.

Q. Again, you have used that term before.

That is stuff, I guess, put together by you and Mary and

maybe a couple of the executive board members?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Just the general way we

operate and function as a volunteer organization.

The things that we would look for is we want to

always make sure that anybody submitting a

franchise has the ability and means to be

successful. We want to make sure that the

programs that we are running is a group, is a

group organization. An individual in terms of the

organization that is asking for the franchise and

the person being designated as the executive

director understands the obligations as to the

terms that are spelled out in the franchise.

In terms of having to run a pageant, you

have to be able to award a minimum of $500 to each

contestant. There is a $650 franchise fee which

has to be paid. We go over the fact that there

are obligations to make sure that the contestants

are attending an orientation session, and the

corporation has a responsibility for covering

those expenses during orientation weekend. Again,

making sure the contestant it ready and prepared

to compete in the Miss Florida pageant.

So we discuss venues, what can and cannot

occur with regard to helping with fund-raising.

The Miss America organization does not allow

charging of entry fees, those kind of things. We

make sure all those guidelines are understood by

someone that is requesting the franchise.

We make sure that they have if they are

not -- if it's a city or university, there are

specific requirements that they don't have to have

a separate corporation or festival. If it's not

and it's just individuals who want to apply for a

franchise, they have to form an actual corporation

in the State of Florida. So they have to be

incorporated. They have to be structured.

So what we do is make sure we are real

clear on what the expectations are from the Miss

Florida pageant to our franchise holder and make

sure all the questions are answered for that

franchise holder. We typically if it's someone we

are not familiar with, we would ask them to

probably submit a resume for themselves as the

executive director and any board members. Again,

make sure what the background is of the

individuals that are applying for the franchise.

So all those things are taken into consideration

when we are awarding a franchise.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. What, if anything, then, was lacking out of

this list that the North Florida Scholarship Organization

or Kevin Sanders as the executive director, what was

missing out of the list that you just said?

A. I think getting back to the concern that

had been expressed was that the manner in which it was

posted as it was going to be canceled, in terms of how

that had been handled. The fact that that was not

discussed or communicated in advance. The fact that it

had been made perfectly clear to me and to others on the

executive board through the posting of that message that

Kevin and Cammie Sanders were done, they were finished

with producing the pageant.

Now, all of a sudden, there is a change of

heart, a regrouping. So all of those are things that,

again, things that we discussed and felt like we needed

more input and discussion.

Q. That is why you, I guess, decided to have a

full executive board meeting?

One second. I have to keep these words

right.

That is why you decided to take everything

to the full board?

A. Correct.

Q. And that was an executive board decision to

take it to the full board?

A. Yes, it was.

MR. SANDERS: I believe this is Number 3.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 3 was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me show you a one, two, three, four

page exhibit. It's titled Miss Florida Pageant Board of

Directors Meeting, October 13, 2006, Orlando, Florida and

ask you if you recognize those minutes?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. Is that the minutes of the meeting of the

full board that the Jacksonville franchise was tabled to

be heard in front of?

A. Yes.

Q. It lists who the board members were that

were present and the board members that were ex officio

and the board members that were absent; is that correct?

A. Correct.

Q. Interestingly enough, it says a guest, Rick

Brinkley was there. Are guests allowed at the full board

meeting?

A. Periodically, we have had people come in as

guests. Rick was also there to conduct a judge's

workshop the following day.

Q. Was Kevin Sanders or anybody from the North

Florida Scholarship Organization requested to attend this

board meeting so that the discussions could be had as

indicated in the September 23rd, 2006 executive minutes?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: No, they were not.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. When you say, no, they were not, nobody

from --

A. No one from the North Florida Scholarship

Organization.

Q. Is there a reason why no one from the North

Florida Scholarship Organization was invited to this

meeting?

A. If you recall the minutes of September 23,

2006, it said a possible discussion with Kevin Sanders.

Q. In your previous discussion about Ruth and

whether or not she may or may not have used the N word,

you were saying that you would think it would really

depend on having a full discussion of people

knowledgeable on the fact; is that correct?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Sorry. State your question

again.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. When the discussion of Ruth, you had said

with regards to your consideration of whether or not to

grant her a franchise based on whether or not she used

the N word that you would like to have full information

about the situation. Isn't that something like what you

said?

MR. BLOCK: Form, characterization.

THE WITNESS: You asked me the question of

if someone had used the N word, how would that

weigh in personally to my decision-making process.

I also indicated in my earlier answer that

I was not a part of that situation when that

allegedly occurred, whatever year that occurred

in, but, personally, I would personally want to

know the outcome of how the situation was

resolved. That was my response.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Well, would you not want to know the

information, the outcome of, I guess, the website in your

discussions on whether or not to renew a franchise?

A. That is possible, but, again, as stated in

the September 23rd, 2006 minutes, it indicated a possible

discussion with Kevin Sanders to occur.

Q. And Kevin Sanders was never notified of

this meeting?

A. Kevin Sanders was not notified of this

meeting.

Q. Kevin Sanders wasn't even informed of this

meeting was being heard, was he?

A. No, Kevin Sanders was not.

Q. Now, what was discussed at this meeting and

by who with regards to the Jacksonville franchise?

A. As stated in the minutes of Miss Florida

board of directors, October 13, 2006, the minutes reflect

the following: "Richard informed the board that there

had been two franchises received for the Miss

Jacksonville Pageant. One submitted by the Miss North

Florida Scholarship Organization, Kevin Sanders listed as

the Executive Director, and one by the Miss Jacksonville

Scholarship Foundation, Ruth Sidbury listed as the

Executive Director. Richard indicated that the Executive

Board had tabled action on this franchise request in

order for the full board of directors to have an

opportunity to provide input given the fact that it had

been indicated by Kevin Sanders through a posting on the

Miss Jacksonville website that the pageant scheduled for

October had been canceled and that he and Cammie would no

longer be running the pageant. Many members of the board

voiced their concerns with granting Kevin the franchise.

There was no one who indicated they were in favor of

awarding the franchise to Kevin. Many indicated that

they felt since there was another option, then the

franchise should be awarded to Ruth. Richard indicated

that the Executive Board would take all the comments

under consideration and that the Executive Board hoped to

have the opportunity to speak with Kevin Sanders prior to

the start of Franchise Meeting scheduled for the next day

before making a final decision."

That is what is reflected in the minutes of

that meeting.

Q. Outside what is reflected in the minutes,

what do you independently recall of the discussion on

that day?

A. Basically, the general discussion was that

given the circumstances of what has transpired with the

posting of the cancellation and the way that matter had

been handled, the board members who spoke and voiced

their opinion indicated they were not in favor of

awarding ahead the franchise to Miss Florida to the North

Florida Scholarship Organization.

Q. On what did they base that information in

order to draw such a conclusion or opinion?

A. Basically, I think it was presented, if I

recall correctly, what was actually posted to the website

about the cancellation and I know some of them had

indicated they had actually seen it on the website.

Q. Was it printed and passed around or just

paraphrased?

A. It wasn't passed around. I think it was

generally paraphrased.

Q. So no one actually had a copy?

A. They could have. I don't recall. It's

possible.

Q. It wasn't passed out by you or Mary or Rob

Loy or Keith Williams?

A. To my knowledge, it was not passed out.

Q. Now, was there any discussion at this full

board meeting from Mary or from you with regards to the

discussion with Kevin Sanders and Ray McLeod and Mary

Sullivan?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Again based on recollection,

testing my memory, I think there was an indication

that there had been a telephone conversation with

Ray, Kevin and Mary, and that since the original

posting that Kevin and Cammie were no longer

interested, that Kevin had expressed an interest

and Mary indicated that Kevin had been instructed

to submit the franchise.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Did Mary Sullivan or anybody submit the

e-mails that had gone back and forth between Mary and Ray

McLeod and Mary Sullivan and Kevin Sanders?

A. I don't recall.

Q. If there had been, would there have been a

reference to such in the minutes somewhere?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I don't know. I don't

recall. I don't recall that being submitted, so I

cannot comment on whether it would have been

reflected in the minutes.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. If I were to tell you that in Mr. Williams'

deposition he indicated that if such had been discussed,

he would have reflected it in the minutes, would that

help you in any way?

A. Mr. Williams was not present at this

meeting.

Q. Do you know who took the minutes then?

A. I actually took the notes for this

particular meeting.

Q. So it could have been discussed and you

just didn't put that down?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I don't recall.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Was anything discussed at this meeting with

regards to Ruth using the N word or being accused of

using the N word?

A. Not that I recall.

Q. Was anything discussed at this meeting with

regards to the reason why Ruth originally had the Miss

Jacksonville franchise taken away from her with regards

to finances?

A. Not that I recall.

Q. So the full board actually didn't have the

full facts when it made its recommendation not to award

the franchise to the North Florida Scholarship

Organization?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: If you are asking me, the

board had whatever information was presented to

them.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. If it wasn't presented e-mails between

Kevin Sanders and Mary Sullivan and e-mails between Mary

Sullivan and Ray McLeod, the board didn't have that to

consider, did it?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: You asked me the question. I

indicated it was mentioned by Mary that the

conversation had occurred between Kevin, Ray and

Mary.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. But that is a conversation.

A. I don't recall if the actual e-mail to my

recollection, I guess to the best of my recollection, I

do not recall that being presented.

Q. And I think your recollection was that no

one brought up any negatives about Ruth Sidbury and the

Jacksonville scholarship organization of past accusations

or financial troubles?

A. Not that I recall, correct.

Q. Again, I ask the question. The full

circumstances of the two organizations vying for the Miss

Jacksonville title weren't fully discussed at this

meeting?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: That would be your opinion

whether or not they were fully discussed.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Well, is there anything that was discussed

that you haven't told me about today?

A. Again, to the best of my recollection.

That was two and a half years ago. It's been two and a

half years ago.

Q. Just the way you answered that question is

like to the best of your recollection there is nothing

else that was discussed other than what you have

testified to here today?

A. To the best of my recollection, that would

be correct.

Q. Let me just ask, at this meeting, do you

recall anything being discussed with regards to matters

or things that may have been either indicated or said by

Jennifer Herrington or said by Jennifer Herrington to any

of the board members?

A. That is a possibility. Again, specifics, I

do not recall.

Q. Do you know who brought those to the

attention of the board?

A. No, I don't recall.

Q. Well, you would recall if it was you. So

it wouldn't have been you bringing that up?

A. I personally don't recall bringing it up.

Q. And you don't recall Mary Sullivan bringing

that up?

A. Again, two and a half years ago, I don't

recall every specific piece of that conversation at the

board meeting.

Q. And do you have any inkling of what the

discussions were with regards to Jennifer Herrington?

A. The only thing I recall was that there had

been a conversation with Jennifer Herrington that related

similar to what was posted on the website. Again, not

remembering details but it had something to do with

whether Jennifer and Jeff were interested in the pageant.

I don't recall anything beyond that. It doesn't mean it

didn't happen. It just means I don't recall it.

MR. SANDERS: The four page exhibit will be

Number 4.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 4, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me go back real quick. I'll give it to

you if you need to look at it. Let's see. You read it.

It said, "Richard indicated that the Executive Board

would take all the comments under consideration and that

the Executive Board hoped to have the opportunity to

speak to Kevin Sanders prior to the start of Franchise

Meeting scheduled for the next day."

Did anyone send the notice to Kevin Sanders

about the executive board wanting to meet with him prior

to the franchise?

A. No, no one sent the notice.

Q. Did anyone call or contact anyone at the

North Florida Scholarship Organization about desiring to

meet with or discuss matters with Kevin Sanders?

A. Not to my recollection.

I think the reason that was indicated is,

if I recall, Mary, I think, indicated that you had

indicated that -- sorry -- that Kevin Sanders was going

to be in attendance at the franchise meeting.

Q. Okay. But the indication was to have a

discussion with Kevin Sanders prior to making decision by

the executive board on the franchise?

A. Correct.

Q. What was the discussion supposed to be

about?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Again, to have -- my feeling

was that we ought to probably have a -- try to

have a face-to-face conversation about what was

posted, the sudden change of heart in terms of why

the sudden change of heart, and if this were to

happen, is this going to happen, it's going to get

canceled again, are we going to be facing another

situation, or not canceling again. So those were

just some of the things that we were thinking

about. We would be probably better off to have

the opportunity to discuss with Kevin Sanders.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Well, now, Kevin Sanders and Cammie Sanders

had been running the Miss Jacksonville pageant for quite

some time; had they not?

A. For several years, yes.

Q. They also ran what, I guess, is called a

stack pageant. They had Miss First Coast pageant that

they had been running for several years also?

A. That is correct.

Q. And at some point, both Kevin Sanders and

Cammie Sanders were recognized as outstanding directors;

were they not?

A. That is correct.

Q. What are the qualifications for being

recognized as outstanding directors?

A. Typically in terms of outstanding

directors, we look at dedication and commitment to the

system, the way someone continuously has good production,

recruits good contestants, raises good scholarship, award

scholarship money, is supportive of the Miss Florida

pageant in general, in terms of their commitment to the

organization. Those are the kind of general things that

are looked at.

Q. With that in mind, with Kevin Sanders as

the sole director, you knew Kevin Sanders had experience

to put on a pageant?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Sure.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. You knew that Kevin Sanders had put on many

pageants before?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: That is right.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. And you knew that Kevin Sanders had a

commitment to the Miss Florida organization?

A. That is correct.

Q. You knew that Kevin Sanders through these

pageants had produced some pretty good contestants for

Miss Florida?

A. That is correct.

Q. So what additional questions, then, did you

have of Kevin Sanders prior to making the decision on the

franchise?

A. Again, I think there was a desire to

possibly have a face-to-face conversation about what had

transpired that caused the posting and the cancellation

of the pageant suddenly. Some concern in terms of the

organization and the commitment without Cammie's

involvement would that still be there in terms of running

the whole organization. Again, wanting to make sure

because this already occurred once, we wanted to make

sure that if it was awarded again, it would not happen

again a couple of months down the line in terms of the

structure. So I think those were just general questions

that were still left hanging.

Q. Did Mary Sullivan not mention any of the

discussions, then, between herself, Kevin Sanders and Ray

McLeod and the reasoning that went into at that point in

time e-mails that went back and forth with regards to

indicating the North Florida Scholarship Organization

would retain the Miss Jacksonville pageant?

MR. BLOCK: Objection, form, asked and

answered.

THE WITNESS: Would you repeat your

question? That threw me off.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Other than, I guess, Mary Sullivan saying

she talked with Kevin Sanders and Ray McLeod, did she

provide the executive board or the full board with any

details of that discussion?

MR. BLOCK: Objection, asked and answered.

THE WITNESS: Again, to the best of my

recollection was she indicated that, you know, you

were willing to go forward with this without

Cammie -- sorry -- Kevin had the desire to go

ahead and do it and move forward without Cammie's

involvement. I think that was the general gist of

what I remember.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. So your concern or the executive board's

concern is then for the meeting with Kevin Sanders is

still what happened to the website even though Kevin

Sanders has indicated a willingness to go forward?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Again, I think part of the

concern was just the way that whole thing had

transpired, and the way it had come out to the

public, and the way it had been handled because,

again, a local franchise is granted the authority

to exist by the Miss Florida Scholarship

Organization. So when these kind of things

happen, people look to the Miss Florida

organization and what are the answers to the

questions. In this particular situation, we don't

always all know those answers to those questions,

the intricacy of what occurred to arrive at this

decision to unfold the way it unfolded, and I

think the general thinking in my mind was to have

a face-to-face conversation, not telephone,

e-mails, et cetera before making the decision.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. So let me just ask it a different way.

Mary Sullivan didn't mention to you that she had had

discussions with Kevin Sanders as to the reason why the

pageant was canceled?

A. She may have. I don't recall. I don't

recall if she did any of the details.

Q. And Mary Sullivan either did or didn't

discuss with you or the full board or the executive board

the reasons why Cammie was no longer going to

participate?

A. She may have. I don't recall any

specifics.

Q. If she may have, assuming then that she

did, what additional questions did you have of Kevin

Sanders then at the meeting prior to the franchise

agreement?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to the form.

THE WITNESS: The same thing I had, the

same thing I stated already in that I felt it

would be to have a face-to-face interaction with

you -- with Kevin -- I'm sorry -- with regard to

all of the information that had been -- if

anything had been relayed or conversations had

been relayed. I think I was looking, kind of

maybe taking a more humanistic approach to have a

face-to-face conversation about issues, not, you

know, e-mails, telephone conversations, et cetera,

because those had not been with the entire --

whatever had been relayed or discussed with Mary

or Ray had not been discussed directly with you

and the people on the executive board that would

be making the decision.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me show you another set of minutes that

say -- it's on a single sheet. It was Plaintiff's

Exhibit Number 19 in the Sullivan deposition. It says

Miss Florida Executive Board of Directors Meeting,

October 14, 2006, University of Central Florida, Orlando,

Florida.

I ask you to look at that and tell me if

you recognize that.

A. Yes, I do.

Q. Did you take those minutes?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. And present were Mary Sullivan, Richard

Walker, Rob Loy and Kitty Potapow.

A. And Ray McLeod.

Q. And Ray McLeod, and Keith Williams was

absent.

A. That is correct.

Q. Again, no notice of this meeting was given

to Kevin Sanders or he wasn't told to report to this

meeting or to show up early to meet with the board, was

there?

A. No, he was not.

Q. You indicate in the one, two, three, fourth

paragraph, it starts off "The Executive Board." Do you

see that?

A. Uh-huh, yes.

Q. It says, "The Executive Board discussed the

matter and decided that based on the input and opinions

of the full board at last nights meeting that we should

move forward with making a decision."

Do you recall what the input and the

opinions are that you were thinking about at that time?

A. Again, going back to when it was open for

discussion at the full board meeting on the 13th, the

general discussion was the concern about the posting to

the website, how the situation had been handled. There

was nobody who spoke up at that particular board meeting

in favor of awarding it to Kevin Sanders and the

Miss North Florida Scholarship Organization. People

voiced an opinion, actually, at that meeting, I think,

that it should not be awarded to Kevin.

Q. But the full board never voted on that, did

they?

A. They didn't vote, no.

Q. And it was only the executive board and

there was only four members of the executive board

present when that vote was taken?

A. Yes, the executive board votes in awarding

the franchises.

Q. But we don't have any rules or regulations

or bylaws that say that, do we?

A. No, we don't.

Q. I think you already acknowledged earlier in

your testimony it's typical in organizations like this

that the full board votes on decision for the

corporation?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to the form.

THE WITNESS: It depends on the way we

structure. It depends on what the decisions are

that need to be made. Our standard operating

procedure for franchises is they are voted upon by

the executive board.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. That standard operating procedure was

developed by you and Mary Sullivan?

A. And agreed to by our executive board and

our board. No one has objected to the standard operating

procedure.

Q. At what meeting of the executive board or

the full board would those standard operating procedures

have been voted on and agreed to?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Standard operating procedures

as voted upon and agreed. They were discussed. I

can't recall the specific meeting where it was

voted on.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. It's a possibility that the full board

hadn't approved any of these general operating procedures

that you are discussing?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I do recall at some point how

we handled and operated franchises was mentioned

and no one had any objection to the way that we

would operate these cases.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Was that in 2002, 2003?

A. I don't recall. I don't recall.

Q. If such had been, it would be reflected in

some minutes of the full board of directors?

A. That is possible.

Q. At this executive board meeting, was

anything brought up with regards to Ruth's application

and the fact that she had been accused of using the N

word to describe black contestants in pageants?

MR. BLOCK: Objection the form.

THE WITNESS: At this particular meeting,

October 14, 2006?

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Yes.

A. Not to my knowledge.

Q. Anything brought up before the full

executive board at this particular meeting discussing

Ruth's lack of providing a financial accounting to her

board or to her organization?

A. No, not to my knowledge.

Q. Was anything brought up at this meeting

with regards to the fact that Ruth Sidbury had already

been awarded a franchise?

A. Awarded a franchise for what pageant?

Q. Let me show you again the minutes of the

October 13th meeting. I am going to just point it out to

you. It says franchises that have been awarded. It says

River City. Isn't River City the pageant that Ruth

Sidbury --

A. That is right. She had been awarded.

Q. So Ruth Sidbury had been awarded the River

City Jacksonville pageant at the meeting on October 13,

2006?

A. That is correct.

Q. And that is the one that she had been

running for quite a number of years up to this point?

A. That is correct.

Q. So you as the executive board, did you all

make any discussions with regards to whether or not Ruth

Sidbury could handle two franchises or whether or not

those franchises needed to be split up?

A. There was conversation to my recollection

or objection about that Ruth could not handle two

franchises and run two pageants.

Q. Was there any discussion with regards to if

Ruth Sidbury already has a pageant and it's the same

pageant she has been running for years, why not award the

pageant to the North Florida Scholarship Organization?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: There was actually -- I don't

recall the specifics regarding that discussion. I

know it had been discussed at some point during

the conversation that Ms. Sidbury previously had

run the Miss Jacksonville pageant, and was

interested in running it again.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. But there was nothing discussed as to why

the franchise was originally taken away from her?

A. No.

Q. So was it the executive board's decision it

was better for Kevin Sanders not to have a franchise than

it was for Ruth to have two?

A. The decision was made to award the

franchise to the Miss Jacksonville Scholarship Foundation

with Ruth Sidbury as the executive director.

Q. Again, we have acknowledged it's not the

individuals that get awarded. It's the organization.

A. With a specific person designated as the

executive director.

Q. Was there any attempt by the executive

board or the full board or any designee by either

organization to contact the North Florida Scholarship

Organization and say, we want to give the franchise back

to you but we are not happy about Kevin Sanders being

executive director?

A. Not to my knowledge.

Q. Was the fact that Kevin Sanders was going

to be executive director the governing decision for the

executive board or was it the fact that the North Florida

Scholarship Organization had applied to renew the

franchise?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: The general concerns had to

do, again, with how the cancellation of the Miss

Jacksonville pageant had transpired and unfolded

with Kevin and Cammie Sanders as the executive

directors.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. And, again, I think we have talked about

that. Your concern essentially is that it was canceled

without notice to the Miss Florida pageant?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: That was one of the

objections, and the method, the way in which it

was canceled and communicated to the general

public.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Do you know how many contestants had signed

up for the Miss Jacksonville pageant at the time it was

canceled?

A. I do not.

Q. Do you think that that would have been good

information to have?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: It's possible.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Do you know how many days before the

scheduled pageant that it was canceled?

A. I do not recall.

Q. Do you think that would have been some good

information to have?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I may have known it at the

time, but I don't recall that.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Do you think the fact that those topics

were discussed with Mary Sullivan should have been

discussed at either the executive board or the full board

meeting regardless if Kevin Sanders was there or not?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: Again, I have stated the

things I remember being discussed. If other

things or issues were discussed, I don't recall

them.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. I mean, you don't recall Mary bringing up

the particulars of the discussion with regards to why the

pageant was canceled and the time frame and the amount of

contestants that had signed up?

MR. BLOCK: Form, asked and answered.

THE WITNESS: What I recall was what was

posted on the website.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. The whole decision is made on the posting

on the website?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: The general information of

what I recall is that was the general basis of

what was posted. That, I remember specifically.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. But nothing with regards to the why and the

wherefore behind the posting?

MR. BLOCK : Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Again, I have stated what I

recall to the best of my recollection I can

remember.

MR. SANDERS: That would be five.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 5 was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Why don't you review that and let me know

when you have had an opportunity to review that.

A. Okay.

Q. That is a one page e-mail that says the

subject is Miss Jacksonville and Miss First Coast. It is

dated 9/16/2006 at 5:40 p.m. Eastern Standard Time; is

that correct?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. And it's from MaryCrwnMry. That is the

e-mail address. Who is MaryCrwnMry?

A. That would be Mary Sullivan.

Q. It says to ramcleod. Who is ramcleod@

mcleodlawfirm?

A. That is Ray McLeod.

Q. Then it says CC to JPH ANGEL. Do you know

who that is?

A. Right off the top of my head, I don't know

who that is.

Q. If I were to suggest to you that that is

Jennifer Herrington --

A. That might be correct.

Q. And then rwalker@miami.edu. Who is that?

A. That is me.

Q. LOYTPA. Who is that?

A. Rob Loy.

Q. And then JKW61.

A. Keith Williams.

Q. And then MAMAKIT777?

A. Kitty Potapow.

Q. Do you recall receiving this e-mail and

reading it?

A. It says I received it. Obviously, I got

it.

Q. You just don't recall?

A. I just don't recall.

Q. But you are not denying that rwalker@

miami.edu is your e-mail address?

A. I am not.

Q. Just looking at the first paragraph, it

talks about they are going to cancel the upcoming pageant

October 21st, 2006?

A. Uh-huh.

Q. It says, "But Jennifer & Jeff Herrington

have stepped in and are going to direct the pageant." Do

you see that?

A. Yes.

Q. By what authority did Mary Sullivan have to

tell Jeff and Jennifer Herrington that they could direct

the pageant without the full board's authority?

A. They would still need to be submitting a

franchise in order to be approved to become official.

Q. But she told them that they could step in;

did she not?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form. Again, no

foundation.

THE WITNESS: It indicates to me there was

a conversation had that they were interested in

running the pageant.

As I stated previously, Mary had

conversations with individuals all the time about

running pageants. It was not to be made official,

though, until the franchise was submitted and

approved.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let's look at the next paragraph. The next

paragraph says: "I have assured Jennifer & Jeff that

they will have our support and assistance, especially

during the next few weeks." What is she talking about

support and assistance if they haven't been awarded a

franchise?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: You would have to ask Mary.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Would it be typical for Mary Sullivan to

say, yeah, you could run the pageant, and let somebody

put in a lot of time and effort in getting something set

up without full board authority?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Again, she can have the

conversation with them about running it,

potentially taking it over, but until the board,

the executive board approves the franchise

agreement, it would not be official.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. But they could act like the franchise based

on Mary's permission?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form and to

foundation.

THE WITNESS: People can do whatever they

want to do as long as they understand it would not

be official until the executive board approves the

franchise.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me ask you this: Do you recall whether

or not the Miss Florida board or Mary Sullivan or

yourself had told the webmaster to change the Miss

Florida website to indicate that Jeff and Jennifer

Herrington were running the pageant after this e-mail?

A. I don't recall that, but changes for the

website are submitted through Mary, and then to the

webmaster. They don't run through me.

Q. So if the website got changed indicating

that Jeff and Jennifer would be running the Jacksonville

pageant, that would have been Mary telling the website

manager to change that?

A. Typically, it would be either Mary or Rob

to change it.

Q. Does she have authority to tell the

webmaster to change the executive director on the

website?

A. She can tell them to change whatever she

wants on the website. Again, it would not be official,

though, until the franchise was voted on and approved.

Q. If a potential contestant, a young lady saw

the Miss Florida website and the contact information was

Jeff and Jennifer Herrington, what is to happen to that

potential contestant if they are not actually the

franchise holder?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Well, until the franchise is

granted it becomes official, there is no

officially a pageant, so --

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. So that potential contestant would just be

out of luck if they contacted Jeff or Jennifer requesting

information and an application to be in the Miss

Jacksonville pageant?

MR. BLOCK: Object to the form.

THE WITNESS: They could contact Jeff and

Jennifer, and how they explained it, they could

say, our intent is that we are going to move

forward with this, we are waiting pending approval

of the Miss Florida organization. Again, I wasn't

privy to how that was communicated to any

contestant.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Is there anything in this e-mail that would

even suggest to you that it is contingent on anything?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: There is a sentence, "There

may be some questions concerning the nonprofit

status, the pageant funds." That doesn't refer to

that. It also refers that Jennifer at one point

had been listed as the co-ed.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. I am going to get to that point, but the

question right now, is there anything in this e-mail that

was sent out to you and to Jennifer Herrington and to Rob

Loy and to Mr. Williams and to Ms. Potapow that there are

any limitations, restrictions on Jennifer and Jeff

Herrington?

A. Not that I notice.

Q. Let's look at that last paragraph. It

says, "Jennifer was listed as the co-ed and while she

technically resigned to act as Business Manager, that was

never made public past the Executive Board. Therefore,

we are adding her back as Executive Director, again an

Executive Board decision."

A. That would refer to an executive board

decision.

Q. Was that an executive board decision?

A. I think what that e-mail is implying that

it would need the -- she could only be added back when

the required above, which goes back to my comment about

it's not over until a franchise is officially executed

listing Jennifer Herrington as an executive director.

Q. But it doesn't say that. It says,

"Therefore, we are adding her back as Executive Director,

again an Executive Board decision." It's indicating that

they are being added back; does it not?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Again, that is your

interpretation. I don't.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. I'll ask it a different way. Was there an

executive board meeting in which this was discussed and

Jennifer's non-public resignation was rescinded and she

was added back as a co-executive director of the Miss

Jacksonville pageant?

A. I don't recall.

Q. So it could have happened. You just don't

remember?

A. I don't recall.

Q. As the chairman of the board --

A. You asked me to answer honestly and

truthfully. That is what I did. I don't recall.

Q. It says, "Call me when you have an

opportunity to speak - Monday will be fine."

Was Mary Sullivan indicating that to all

the people or to Ray McLeod or --

A. Since it was addressed, Dear Ray, I would

assume it was to Ray.

MR. SANDERS: That is Number 6.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 6 was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. One last question on this e-mail. Mary

wouldn't have made all these decisions herself without

board approval, would she?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: You know, I didn't recall

this e-mail, so I don't recall the specifics of

what is stated in this e-mail.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. But if this e-mail had been identified by

Mary Sullivan as Exhibit 4 in her deposition, and she has

identified that she sent that out, is there any question

that that is what she wrote in the e-mail?

A. Again, if Mary has identified this as what

she wrote on the e-mail, this is what she wrote on the

e-mail. I do not recall the e-mail.

Q. If Mary made these decisions on her own

without board approval, does she have authority to do

that?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Again, I don't recall the

e-mail, so I don't recall if there were any

decisions made regarding what is stated in that.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. I will ask it another way. Well, I'll even

ask a different question.

Are all minutes of the executive board

taken?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Most -- yes, official

minutes, official meetings, executive board

meetings would be taken.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. If there was a discussion with regards to

Jeff and Jennifer and there was an executive board

decision to rescind her resignation and to reinstate her

as a co-executive director of the Miss Jacksonville

pageant, that would be reflected in some executive board

meeting?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: It should be.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me show you another e-mail, let you

look at it, and when you are finished reading it just

indicate that you are finished.

A. Okay.

Q. Have you seen that e-mail before?

Essentially, those are two e-mails. It's

one e-mail from Kevin Sanders, Monday, September 18th,

2006 to Ray McLeod and Ray McLeod's response thereto.

A. I don't recall seeing that.

Q. So that e-mail has never been brought up

before a full board or an executive board meeting?

A. I don't recall seeing this e-mail.

Q. Had you been able to see that e-mail, would

that have answered some of your concerns or questions

that you would have with regards to why the pageant was

canceled?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I mean, it alludes to some of

the things possibly going on with you and between

you and Cammie.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. You mean Kevin Sanders and Cammie Sanders?

A. I mean, between Kevin Sanders and Cammie

Sanders, but, again, it doesn't go into specific detail.

Q. It also indicates that Jennifer Herrington

had come by and picked up essentially all the

organization's paperwork under direction of Mary; does it

not?

A. It does say that.

Q. Did Mary have authority to tell Jennifer

Herrington that she could do that?

A. Again, whatever conversation Mary had with

Jennifer, I'm not exactly sure. I mean, I do recall some

kind of conversation that they, again, back to the

posting of the website, where there was a reference to

Jennifer and Jeff were interested in taking it over. So

I'm assuming this had something to do with that reference

on the website that Jennifer and Jeff Herrington were

looking at taking the pageant over. It appears to be a

conversation.

You are saying now Kevin Sanders to Ray

McLeod referencing Jennifer Herrington picking up the

documents.

MR. SANDERS: That will be Number 7.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 7, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. I'll let you read that.

A. Okay.

Q. That is an e-mail from Kevin Sanders to

Mary Sullivan and Ray McLeod of September 18th, 2006, at

5:11 p.m.; is that correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. And it essentially just says, "Dear Mary

and Ray, Thank you both for your kindness and

understanding. Kevin Sanders," correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. Was this e-mail ever given to the executive

board or the full board or ever discussed with the

executive board or full board?

A. Not to my knowledge.

MR. SANDERS: That will be Number 8.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 8, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me show you a two page e-mail. The

original e-mail was from MaryCrwnMry to kevsand1@

bellsouth.net, cc to ramcleod@mcleodlawfirm on Monday,

September 18, 2006.

And then a reply from Kevin Sanders on

Tuesday, September 19th.

I'll let you read that and when you have

completed that, please let me know.

A. Okay.

Q. Have you ever seen that e-mail prior to

today?

A. I have seen it prior to today.

Q. When did you see it prior to today?

A. I don't recall specifically.

Q. Let me ask you, had you seen this e-mail

prior to the decision that was made by the executive

board not to renew the franchise with the North Florida

Scholarship Organization?

A. I don't recall that I had seen it prior to

that.

Q. Had that e-mail been reviewed or read to

the full board or to the executive board prior to the

decision being made with regards to the Miss Jacksonville

franchise in October of 2006?

A. Had this been read to the board?

Q. Yes.

A. No.

Q. That would be neither to the full board or

the executive board?

A. To my knowledge. The first part of the

e-mail from Mary to Kevin, December 18, 2006, I do,

paraphrasing what I recall, was a summation that Mary

communicated with regard to the conversation that Ray,

Kevin and Mary had had over the telephone.

Q. Let's look at the first line of that. It

says, "Dear Kevin: I am pleased that we could talk about

the situation and resolve most of the issues."

What does she mean, if you know, to resolve

most of the issues?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: I would assume it has to do

with what was posted on the website and how that

whole thing transpired, why the pageant was being

canceled, why Cammie and Kevin were no longer

interested in running the pageant. How that

whole, again, thing came down and got

communicated.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. But, again, based on your previous

testimony that resolution between Mary Sullivan and Kevin

Sanders was never brought up either at a full board

meeting or executive board meeting, was it?

MR. BLOCK: Objection as to form.

THE WITNESS: In terms of it being a

resolution, what was communicated was that there

had been a conversation between Kevin, Mary and

Ray regarding the interest in Kevin serving as the

executive director and there was a summation

basically of that conversation.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. And the next sentence says, "We value your

long time participation and want to see it continue."

What do you think she meant by want to see

it continue?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: You would have to ask her.

She wrote the e-mail.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Did Mary Sullivan have the authority either

from the general rules, the bylaws or any other rules or

regulations to resolve issues with local franchise

holders and to make sure that their participation

continued?

A. In day-to-day operating she would have

conversations with all franchise holders if issues arose.

Try to work through and solve solutions that had

problems.

Q. So she had that authority?

MR. BLOCK: Objection form.

THE WITNESS: She had the authority to have

conversations about how issues may be resolved.

She did not have authority to grant a franchise to

anyone.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let's go to the next one, "I would like to

confirm some of the things we discussed today." Number

one, it says, "You will be listed as the Executive

Director of the Miss Jacksonville Pageant and will

execute a franchise agreement for that pageant on or

before October 14, 2006."

A. Correct. That is what it says.

Q. Was Kevin Sanders listed as executive

director for the Miss Jacksonville pageant after this

e-mail?

A. I don't recall.

Q. If I was to suggest to you that the website

was changed from Jennifer and Jeff Herrington running the

Miss Jacksonville franchise to Kevin Sanders running the

Jacksonville franchise and Jennifer Herrington running

the Miss First Coast franchise on the Miss Florida's

website, would that refresh your recollection?

MR. BLOCK: Objection, form.

THE WITNESS: Again, without seeing the

website, I don't want to comment. It could have

been. It's a possibility.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. You have indicated that if the website gets

changed, that goes through Mary Sullivan?

A. Yes, and sometimes Rob took care of that.

Q. Do you know as an executive board member

whether or not Kevin Sanders actually submitted a

franchise agreement on or about October 14, 2006?

A. To my knowledge, yes.

Q. Paragraph two says, "The pageant previously

scheduled for October 21, 2006 is not going to take

place. You will reschedule the preliminary for a later

date i.e. January, February or March 2007."

A. That is correct. That is what it states.

Q. And she wouldn't state that unless it had

been discussed and agreed to, would she?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Again, I was not privy to the

conversation had between Mary, Kevin and Ray, so I

am assuming this is an accurate reflection of that

conversation that was had.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. So the issue of the pageant being canceled

either on the website or otherwise was pretty much

resolved by that one statement; was it not?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: It indicates that the pageant

was going to be rescheduled is what it says.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Number three says, "Will you be revising

your website? When I last checked, your message was

still posted."

Do you know if the Miss Jacksonville First

Coast website changed the website and removed the

posting?

A. In the response that Kevin Sanders made to

this e-mail September 19, 2006, it indicates that, "The

website is back up. I will have to revise some of the

graphics, which at my skill level may take some time, but

I anticipate I can accomplish this within two or

three weeks." So it doesn't specifically say the posting

was taken down. It does say the website was back up.

Q. So you don't know if it was up or down?

A. I can't tell from this response.

Q. But, again, the response from Kevin Sanders

to Mary, essentially, is, "Thank you for working with me.

Yes, the corporation issue is being resolved. I will be

filing the appropriate paperwork with Tallahassee."

A. That is what it says, correct.

Q. So the response here from Kevin Sanders is

directly related to the terms and conditions cited by

Mary Sullivan in her e-mail to Kevin Sanders; does it

not?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: That is what it appears to

be.

MR. SANDERS: That will be Number 9.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 9, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. I am going to again point your attention to

the Miss Florida executive board of directors meeting

October 14, 2006, which is Exhibit 5 today. That

indicates that ex officio member Ray McLeod was present

at that meeting?

A. Yes, it does.

Q. Let me show you -- let me ask you one more

question.

You are fairly firm in your recollection

that the majority of the reasons why the franchise was

not renewed in the North Florida Scholarship Organization

was because of the posting on the website and the way the

pageant was terminated?

MR. BLOCK: Form, asked and answered.

THE WITNESS: Yes.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me show you another e-mail. Actually,

it's two e-mails, one from the Miss Jacksonville pageant

to Ray McLeod and the response from Ray McLeod back to

the Miss Jacksonville pageant.

A. Uh-huh. Okay.

Q. What does Mr. McLeod indicate was the

reason explained to him that the franchise wasn't renewed

in the name of the North Florida Scholarship

Organization?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: It states, "Last night I

spoke briefly with Mary and she said the board was

of the belief that your 'plan' for the pageant was

too unclear such that Ruth's request was approved.

Mary also said the board would likely approve a

future request using a different name if you

evidenced a committee and plans in place. Ray."

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Was there ever a discussion with regards to

any plans of how the respective franchisees, either

Jacksonville Scholarship Organization or North Florida

Scholarship Organization were going to put on the

pageant?

A. I think -- what my recollection was with

reference to plans was the unclear nature of the fact

that it had already been canceled once. Was there truly

a commitment to hold this Miss Jacksonville pageant at a

later date? There was some sentiment among the members

that that could be a risk. It may or may not occur. The

board did not want to be without a Miss Jacksonville

title holder. So because of that uncertainty, I think

probably some board members felt it was in the best

interest to approve the franchise to the Miss

Jacksonville organization.

Q. That would be the Miss Jacksonville

Scholarship Foundation?

A. Correct, yes.

Q. He doesn't indicate any other reasoning

besides that, does he?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form. The

document speaks for itself.

THE WITNESS: I have nothing more to add,

what the document said and what I just answered.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. So what plan did Ruth have that was better

than the plan of the North Florida Scholarship

Organization? And I have a follow-up question on that.

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Again, with the Miss Florida

Scholarship Organization, the plan and issue was

the fact that the pageant had been canceled once.

It was indicated that, you know, based on the

previous exhibit you just shared with me, there

was a conversation had that it would be

rescheduled.

There were some who felt that it may or may

not be rescheduled, and for those particular

reasons because of the posting, the way it was

handled, the fact it was canceled, the fact that

there may or may not be a Miss Jacksonville

pageant, the fact that there was an indication and

an attempt to reschedule, which may or may occur,

there were some board members who felt it was

better to award the franchise to Ruth, which is

what this e-mail indicates to me.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me go to the second sentence. It says,

"Mary also said the board would likely approve a future

request using a different name if you evidenced a

committee and plans in place."

What requirements other than the franchise

agreement are required in order to submit an application

for a franchise?

A. Again, I think I previously answered that

in terms of it has to be a corporation, you have to feel

there is a structure in place that is going to allow the

franchise to be successful. I think there was some

concern in this particular case in terms of without

Cammie was that going to be possible for all that to

happen. I'm not sure who the other committee members

were that were going to be part of helping pull this

pageant off. So, again, the same things you would think

about in awarding a new franchise are the things, some of

the things, concerns that I think were expressed to you.

Q. This wasn't a new franchise. You already

testified that you knew Kevin Sanders knew how to put a

pageant and had put on pageants before, and he had even

been recognized as an outstanding executive director,

correct?

A. That is correct, and also in conjunction

with Cammie Sanders, and, I guess, there was just some

concern about given the circumstance, again, back to my

same answer, how this had been handled, how this had been

presented, how publicly it had happened. Tentative

conversations had been had in terms of rescheduling,

possibly rescheduling, all those kinds of things. Those

were all the same factors that weighed into the decision.

Q. But all that is not reflected in any of the

minutes, is it?

A. It is part of the discussion.

Q. But it's not in the minutes?

A. All discussion items -- the way some people

take minutes, every single discussion point is not

necessarily listed in the minutes.

MR. SANDERS: That will be Number 10.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 10, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me show you another e-mail. It says,

subject, Miss Jacksonville/First Coast, 9/16/2006, from

LOYTPA, I think we established that is Rob Loy, to

TFickey600. Who is that?

A. That is Tim Fickey. He's the webmaster.

Q. Then it's also cc to MaryCrwnMry. It's not

cc to any other members of the board. I show you that

and when you have finished reading it, let me know.

A. Okay.

Q. That is a note to Mr. Fickey, the

webmaster, to basically change the website to reflect

that Miss Jacksonville is going to be under the executive

director of -- let's see. That is a communication to

remove Kevin and Cammie Sanders as executive directors

from the Miss Jacksonville pageant and put Jennifer

Herrington's name in place; is that correct?

A. That is what it states.

Q. Again, Mary Sullivan had the authority to

tell Rob Loy to tell Tim Fickey to do that?

A. She obviously did or there is some

communication back and forth between Mary and Rob

regarding this matter, yes.

Q. This with the other e-mails that you have

already read with regards to Jennifer and Jeff taking

over the Miss Jacksonville franchise; does it not?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: It aligns with those e-mails,

yes.

MR. SANDERS: This will be Number 11.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 11, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. I'll go ahead and get you started reading

this. This is a two page e-mail, subject, Miss

Jacksonville, dated 9/17/2006 from MaryCrwnMry to

JPH ANGEL, which is Jennifer Herrington. Let me know

when you are finished reading that.

MR. BLOCK: Just a note that it's half past

or actually 4:35. At 5:00 o'clock, I made it in

three minutes last time, I have to feed the meter

again.

THE WITNESS: I have to feed the meter

sometime shortly after 5:00.

Okay.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Have you seen that e-mail before?

A. I cannot recall.

Q. This e-mail was acknowledged by Mary

Sullivan in her deposition as Sullivan's Exhibit Number

5.

I just want to hit a few things on this

e-mail. In the first paragraph, it essentially is the

last sentence. It says, "Kevin's posting on the website

of course, tells another story and sends mixed messages

to everyone." What mixed messages is she talking about;

if you know?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Again, you would have to ask

her.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. She didn't mention anything at any of the

meetings about sending mixed messages and her feelings on

that?

A. I don't recall the word mixed messages

being used. I think in general what was mentioned in the

meetings was the general message of what was posted on

the website that I stated several times. It has to do

with the pageant being canceled and Cammie not wanting

anything to do with this, and, therefore, we were getting

out of this.

Q. The second paragraph says, "This is my

recommendation. I would meet with them and pick up the

records. I would then consider only holding the Miss

Jacksonville title and Miss Jacksonville's Outstanding

Teen title as opposed to do 4 (four) titles." Again,

what authority does Mary have to make those

recommendations to Jennifer Herrington?

A. Again, you would have to ask Mary because

she put this in writing. I'm assuming it was in response

to the fact that this posting was listed and there was

trying to be some resolution to how to get out of the

situation, but you would need to consult her. She wrote

this.

Q. Again, we have taken her deposition. I'm

just trying to figure out what she may or may not -- if

she discussed with you or with the executive board

Jennifer Herrington stepping in and just taking over the

Miss Jacksonville title and the Jacksonville Outstanding

Teen title or was she just doing this on her own?

A. I think there had been some discussion with

Jennifer. Again, back to the posting. It referenced the

posting by Kevin and Cammie that Jennifer and Jeff were

interested in taking it over, which implies some kind of

conversation between Kevin and Cammie and Jeff and

Jennifer.

So I am assuming that partially, this

discussion partially occurred as a result of what was

posted on that website.

Again, it terms of this, that may be what

appeared to be a resolution based on what was posted on

the website and conversations Mary was having with

Jennifer.

Q. Was this e-mail ever brought up before the

executive board or the full board for discussion?

A. I don't remember this e-mail being brought

up for discussion.

MR. SANDERS: Number 12.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 12, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me show you another e-mail. This is

Miss Jacksonville is the subject, dated 9/17/2006, from

JPH ANGEL to MaryCrwnMry. This, again, was introduced in

the Sullivan deposition as Exhibit Number 9.

A. Okay.

Q. Have you ever seen that e-mail before?

A. I don't recall seen this e-mail.

Q. Was this e-mail ever brought up before the

full board or before the executive board for discussion

with regards to the renewal of the franchise?

A. I don't recall. To the best of my

knowledge, I don't think so.

Q. There's a lot of interesting things in this

e-mail, but I want to go and just ask you on -- let's

see. It's not really blocked. I believe it would be the

third paragraph, where it is says, "Cammie is fully

aware." Do you see that?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. It says, "I have also called a meeting for

tomorrow evening at my house with people who are willing

to help Jeff and I proceed with the pageant. I have

called all of our titleholders and as you can imagine

they are all very confused and shocked but have assured

me that they will rally around Jeff and I and jump in and

do whatever it takes to keep the pageant going."

I get the impression in that e-mail that

Jennifer Herrington is acting like an executive director.

Does she have the authority to act like an executive

director based on just Mary Sullivan sending her e-mails?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Again, back to what I have

stated earlier, in the other e-mails that you gave

me, I think this was an attempt based on the fact

that Kevin and Cammie Sanders had posted on the

website that Jennifer and Jeff Herrington were

interested in taking this pageant over. That

appeared to de done so in accordance with Kevin

and Cammie. So I think there was an assumption

that this could be worked out potentially with

Jennifer Herrington serving as executive director.

This particular e-mail you showed me also

references the fact that there is some

conversation about the North Florida Scholarship

Organization and Kevin stating that there is

potential conversation about Kevin remaining as

the president of the scholarship organization in

lieu of the fact that Jeff and Jennifer might be

operating the pageant.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Was this e-mail ever brought before the

full board or the executive board?

A. Again, I don't remember. Not to my

recollection.

MR. SANDERS: Number 13.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 13, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. I'll show you a two page -- it's two pages,

although at the top it says one of three, but it's only a

two page exhibit. It says, "Your e mail," 9/17/2006,

from MaryCrwnMry to JPH ANGEL. I believe if you want to

compare, I believe it is an answer to the e-mail that you

just looked at.

A. Okay.

Q. Have you ever seen that e-mail before?

A. Again, to the best of my recollection, I

don't recall seeing this.

Q. Was this response to Ms. Herrington's

e-mail ever published, read or distributed to the

executive board or the full board prior to making any

decisions on the franchise?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to foundation.

THE WITNESS: Not to my recollection.

MR. SANDERS: That will be 14.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 14, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me show you another e-mail. It says,

subject, "Pageant & Business Manager," dated

September 19, 2006, from JPH ANGEL to MaryCrwnMry,

LOYTPA, MAMAKIT777, JKW61, rwalker@Miami.edu, and

ramcleod@mcleodlawfirm.com.

A. Okay.

Q. Have you ever seen that e-mail before

today?

A. Obviously, I did at some point because it

came to me.

Q. Your e-mail address is listed on there?

A. Yes, that is correct.

Q. But you don't recall seeing that e-mail?

A. Again, if I got it, I'm sure I read it

probably September 19, 2006.

Q. Was this e-mail ever brought up before the

executive board or the full board with regards to making

decisions on the Miss Jacksonville franchise?

A. Not this specific e-mail, but I recall, I

do recall there was a conversation, I think. Again, my

memory is -- I don't recall this specific e-mail being

brought up. I think it was mentioned that Jennifer was

officially resigning as the business manager. I think

there was some mention probably at some point -- I'm sure

there was some mention that Jeff and Jennifer were not

going to be pursuing the pageant.

Q. A couple of questions on that. If you

can -- again, I am just going to go with separations as

paragraphs. If you look at one, two, three, the fourth

paragraph, it says, "I have also noticed."

A. Yes.

Q. She says, "I have also noticed that my name

and address are listed under the Miss First Coast pageant

on the Miss Florida web site and Kevin's with my address

is listed under Miss Jacksonville. You may want Rob or

the webmaster to correct that when they get a chance."

Do you know if Kevin Sanders' name was

listed on the Miss Florida website with regards to

running the Miss Jacksonville franchise?

A. I do not.

Q. If you go from that paragraph down to the

one -- to the second one, it says, "You, Mary."

A. Uh-huh.

Q. "You, Mary," this is what it says, "You,

Mary - personally along with Rob, Keith, Richard and

Kitty took a chance on me as Business Manager when my

titleholder was crowned under false pre-tenses."

What do you, as Richard Walker, know about

Jennifer Herrington having a titleholder crowned under

false pretenses?

A. I'm going to take a stab. I am assuming

she is referencing the crowning of Candace Cragg.

Q. Why is she considering that a crowning

under false pretenses?

A. There were some issues regarding Candace

Cragg and her documentation, regarding her transcripts

and schools she attended. I am assuming that is what

that is referencing.

Q. Was there an opinion either by

Ms. Herrington, and I am just going to use the names

Mary, Rob, Keith, Richard or Kitty, that anyone at the

North Florida Scholarship Organization had anything to do

with falsifying documents?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I don't think anyone has ever

thought that anyone from the Miss Florida

Scholarship Pageant falsified documents.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. So when she says that, and, again, I think

she is implying that Mary, Rob, Keith, Richard and Kitty

knew that a titleholder was crowned under false

pretenses. Was there ever any accusations by you or the

other individuals that the North Florida Scholarship

Organization or anyone had done anything wrong in the

crowning of Candace?

A. No. The wrongdoing was done by Candace.

I don't know why she is referencing that.

You would have to ask Jennifer.

MR. SANDERS: That will be 15.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 15, was

marked for Identification.)

MR. BLOCK: Why don't we break here.

MR. SANDERS: Yes, that will be good.

(Recess taken.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Have you he ever seen the e-mail, and I

will just identify it since we were off the record. The

subject says "Your recent e mail." It's dated 9/20/2006,

from MaryCrwnMry to JPH ANGEL, which I'm going to suggest

to you is her response to the letter you previously

looked at, which was Exhibit 15 in this deposition.

A. I don't recall seeing this previously.

Q. Was that e-mail ever brought up before the

full board or the executive board before making any

decisions on who was to receive the Miss Jacksonville

franchise?

A. To the best of my recollection, no, this

e-mail was not brought up.

Q. Let's look at just a couple of sections.

In the first paragraph, I believe it's the third

sentence, it says, "We discussed."

A. Yes, uh-huh.

Q. It says, "We discussed that Ray & I had

spoken with Kevin and he stated he would continue to do

the Miss Jacksonville Pageant, but not Miss First Coast.

If for some reason Kevin decided differently, or by

October 14th, he did not submit a franchise agreement, it

was agreed that the Miss Jacksonville title would be

available." Is that the reply of Mary Sullivan to

Jennifer Herrington?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to foundation.

THE WITNESS: That is what the e-mail

states.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Again, this has been identified by Mary

Sullivan in her deposition, and it's introduced as an

exhibit in her deposition as Number 7. This would be

consistent with the other e-mails that Mary Sullivan sent

so Kevin Sanders with regards to his continuation of the

Miss Jacksonville pageant; would it not?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: It seems to follow a

continuation, yes.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. It seems to acknowledge that Kevin Sanders

would be running the Jacksonville pageant, but not the

First Coast pageant?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Again, that is what the

e-mail states.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. It seems to only have the conditions on it

that if Kevin decided differently or did not file the

franchise agreement by October 14th; is that correct?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to the form.

THE WITNESS: That is what the e-mail

states.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. We have already established that a

franchise was submitted by the North Florida Scholarship

Organization by Kevin Sanders prior to October 14th?

A. That is correct.

Q. Let me count down again. If I count

spaces, it would be the fourth paragraph. It says, "I

called Keith."

A. Okay.

Q. It states, "I called Keith this morning to

see if he could shed some light on your decision. Ray

also called me to say that he had spoken with you

yesterday regarding the incorporation documents and as

far as he knew, you were planning to direct a local

pageant."

Jennifer Herrington had not been approved

by an executive board or a full board decision to run

Miss First Coast at this point in time, had she, on

September 20, 2006?

A. Not to my recollection.

Q. But we have already looked at e-mails

between Jennifer Herrington and Mary Sullivan which had

indicated that she would direct that pageant; have we

not?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: Yes, there were e-mails that

suggested that.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Mary seems to be acknowledging that Ray,

and I'm going to -- can we say that is Ray McLeod?

A. I would assume it's Ray McLeod.

Q. That Ray was assisting Jennifer in

incorporating, which is one of the prerequisites that I

think you stated to have a franchise in Florida; is that

correct?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: That is correct.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. So based on Mary's e-mails and

conversations with Jennifer Herrington, she was

proceeding with an incorporation that set up for a local

and was getting the assistance of Ray McLeod?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form, foundation.

THE WITNESS: That is what this implies.

MR. SANDERS: That will be Number 16.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 16, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me show you another e-mail that is

originally from JPHANGEL to kevsand1@bellsouth.net on

Tuesday, October 17, 2006, and a reply from Kevin Sanders

and ask you to look at that and tell me if you have seen

that before?

A. Okay.

Q. Have you ever seen that e-mail before?

A. No, I have not.

Q. When Jennifer Herrington indicates in her

message to Kevin Sanders, "Maybe you should have met with

me when I offered? I could have helped shed a little

light on the whole pageant thing. Maybe you would have

realized 'WHO' was telling the truth."

Do you know of some secret plot, plan,

conspiracy or something with regards to the taking of the

Jacksonville franchise away from the North Florida

Scholarship Organization?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I have no idea what she is

referring to.

MR. SANDERS: Number 17.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 17, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me show you another e-mail originally

from JPHANGEL to kevsand1@bellsouth.net on Tuesday,

October 17, 2006 at 3:16 p.m.

A. Okay.

Q. Ms. Herrington indicates, "It's not just a

matter of telling you things.....you need to see proof of

what I had been telling you from the beginning. It would

take me all day to write down everything I know......and

frankly I do not have the time. I am going out of town

early in the morning and will not be returning until

Sunday night. I wish you had been this interested

before......now it is too late. We both lost something

very special to us, and it could have been prevented."

Do you know how the loss of the Miss

Jacksonville pageant could have been prevented by a

conversation with Jennifer Herrington?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to foundation, form.

THE WITNESS: I have no idea what she is

talking about in this e-mail.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. You know anything about the proof that she

is talking about?

A. Again, I have no idea of anything she is

talking about or referring to in this e-mail.

Q. And, again, have you had any discussions

with Jennifer Herrington prior to these e-mails being

sent out?

A. I have had no discussions with Jennifer

Herrington about this matter, no.

Q. Did Jennifer Herrington have any

discussions with any board members to your knowledge?

A. You have to ask them individually.

Q. And I think you had mentioned earlier in

your deposition that there were some matters brought up

about, I guess, Jennifer Herrington and some discussions

either with her or about her.

Was there anything that would have provided

her with some kind of insight that she could make a

statement that she has all this evidence?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I have no idea what is being

referred to in this e-mail.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. And you have never seen that e-mail before?

A. No, I have not.

MR. SANDERS: Number 18.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 18, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. I will show you another e-mail. That

e-mail originally from JPHANGEL to kevsan1@bellsouth.net

on October 17th at 5:14 p.m.

A. Yes.

Q. Have you ever seen that e-mail before?

A. I have not.

Q. Again, if you look at Jennifer Herrington's

e-mail where it says, "I am confused," you see that?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. It says, "I am confused," and then dot,

dot, dot. It says, "Kevin I am not kidding, there is way

too much for me to put in an email, besides how informal

is that."

Again, she is referencing some kind of

knowledge that she has with regards to the way the

franchise was awarded. You don't have any clue what she

is talking about there?

A. I do not.

Q. And you don't know of anybody on the board

or the board of directors that may have been discussing

this with her?

A. You would have to ask them individually.

MR. SANDERS: That will be Number 19.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 19, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me show you another e-mail from

JPHANGEL to kevsand1 on Tuesday, October 17th at

7:13 p.m.

A. Okay.

Q. Have you ever seen that e-mail before?

A. I have not.

Q. Let me just ask you a few questions about

in the very first paragraph there, I believe it's the

second sentence. It says, "I have to tell you I am not

at all surprised, and I am not usually the type of person

to say this to someone but 'I told you so.'"

And then she goes on and says, "I told you

that afternoon in your office but you chose to turn the

other cheek and contact Mary and Ray and pursue this

totally on your own."

What is it that Jennifer Herrington knew

prior to the franchise meeting if everything that you

said and testified to today and the minutes of the

franchise meeting indicated there was no decision until

October 14th?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: I have no idea. You would

have to ask Jennifer Herrington. I don't know

what she is referring to.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. So Jennifer Herrington's implications in

all these e-mails that she knew something was preordained

or predecided has no basis as far as you know?

MR. BLOCK: Form, characterization.

THE WITNESS: As far as I know, I have no

idea what she is talking about or who she is

referring she talked to or where she thinks she

got information. I have no idea.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Look down, I guess -- again, I'm going to

go by spaces. It would be the sixth paragraph. It

starts with, "I am sure."

A. Yes.

Q. She says, "I am sure you heard that I

resigned from Business Manager......do you want to know

the real reason why? or maybe you could care less! but

for the record.....and only Jeff and Emily and now you

know the only reason. I could not personally be a part

of a board that told me one thing and then told you

something completely different."

What, if anything, did the board tell

Jennifer Herrington about either running a franchise,

having a franchise, the Miss Jacksonville pageant, the

Miss First Coast pageant? What is she talking about

there?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I have no idea what she is

talking about.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Did Jennifer Herrington at any point in

time ever have any discussions either with particular

board members or the board of the corporation, the full

board or the executive board?

MR. BLOCK: Form and foundation.

THE WITNESS: You would have to ask her and

other members of the board if she had individual

conversations with board members. I'm not aware

of those conversations.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. As the chairman of the board and the CEO,

you never conducted any board meetings where Jennifer

Herrington either appeared or there was any discussions

with regards to Jennifer Herrington and the Miss

Jacksonville franchise or otherwise?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: There were board meetings

where she appeared because she was the business

manager at one point in time.

Are you referring to board meetings where

specifically this issue was discussed?

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Correct.

A. No.

Q. Then if you will look at the very next

paragraph, it says, "Let me know anytime you want some

good reading......I have some emails I think you might

like to see....once again, these are the same ones

offered to you before and you did not want to meet with

me."

Did you know what e-mails she is referring

to?

A. I do not.

Q. Are there e-mails that you have received as

the CEO or chairman of the board or just as a member of

the board either from Jennifer Herrington or otherwise

from any individual with regards to the Miss Jacksonville

franchise, Kevin Sanders, Cammie Sanders, and the

decision to be made on who is to get the Miss

Jacksonville franchise?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form. Other than

anything that has been introduced so far.

THE WITNESS: Other than anything that has

been introduced so far, not to my knowledge.

MR. SANDERS: That will be Number 20.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 20, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me show you another e-mail from

JPHANGEL to kevsand1 on Tuesday, October 17, 2006, at

9:18 p.m.

A. Okay.

Q. Have you ever seen that e-mail before?

A. No, I have not.

Q. Look at the third sentence, which actually

would be just one line down. It says, "The one thing."

A. Okay.

Q. She says, "The one thing that I think you

need to know is that everything that took place in your

office on that Monday was what I was instructed to do."

Do you know if anyone instructed Jennifer

Herrington to go and pick up paperwork and documents from

the North Florida Scholarship Organization to take over

the Miss Jacksonville pageant?

A. Again, what was introduced earlier, there

was an e-mail that indicated that there was some

reference to go pick up the documents.

Q. And that would have been from Mary

Sullivan?

A. From Mary Sullivan.

Q. To Jennifer Herrington?

A. That is all I'm aware of.

Q. So that statement would corroborate what

the previous e-mail was saying?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: It could.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Look at not the next sentence, but the

sentence after that. It says, "As you know."

A. Okay.

Q. "As you know I resigned from Business

Manager for a reason.....and that was I felt like I had

been let down. I had people telling me one thing and

then you and (your letter to me) telling me another. It

was a place I did not feel comfortable in. I now find my

life 'empty'. I am not part of any pageant and have no

Miss Florida to take care of."

What, if anything, to your knowledge, was

Jennifer Herrington being told that was different than

what was being told to Kevin Sanders or any

representatives of the North Florida Scholarship

Organization?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: I have no idea what she is

referring to.

MR. SANDERS: That will be Number 21.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 21, was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Any of these e-mails from Jennifer

Herrington to Kevin Sanders that you just reviewed, were

any of those brought up, discussed, reproduced or read to

either the executive board or to the full board of

directors for Miss Florida?

A. Not to my knowledge.

Q. And as far as your knowledge is concerned,

you have no understanding of what, if anything, Jennifer

Herrington is talking about as far as evidence, documents

and e-mails, and being told one thing and being told

another?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

THE WITNESS: I have no idea what she is

referring to.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Let me show you an eight page document

which was identified by Mary Sullivan and is Exhibit

Number 20 in her deposition. I will ask you if you have

seen that before and please feel free to read the whole

thing if necessary.

A. Okay.

Q. Have you seen that document before?

A. It's the franchise submitted for 2006-2007

by the Miss Jacksonville Scholarship Foundation.

Q. That would be Ruth Sidbury and, I guess, it

is Karen Miller as executive director?

A. Correct.

Q. When was this franchise submitted?

A. It doesn't have a submission date on here.

Q. I can suggest to you if you look at page

seven, I am just going to --

A. There is a signature.

Q. I am going to assume there is a date on

that page with the signature of Ruth Sidbury.

A. Ruth Sidbury signed the franchise agreement

on September 25th, 2006.

Q. Do you know if this came in before or after

the franchise agreement was submitted by the North

Florida Scholarship Organization under Kevin Sanders?

A. Don't know.

Q. What, if any, consideration does the

original franchise holder get in the renewal of the

franchise?

A. Franchise agreements are awarded for one

year at a time.

Q. I think we have already established

earlier. I don't want to go through there and get it

out. Several individuals you already indicated had

franchises for at least the seven years that you have

been on the board, so --

A. Correct.

Q. What, if any, consideration does a current

franchise holder get when they resubmit a franchise

agreement?

MR. BLOCK: Form.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Or is it just rubber stamped?

MR. BLOCK: Form and foundation.

THE WITNESS: It's not rubber stamped. We

review the franchise upon request and we look at

their success, their track record, their results

in the past year, if there are any issues or

concerns that come up over the year regarding

either the corporation or the executive director.

All those things that we discussed are taken into

consideration.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. And would there be any consideration at all

with regards to one person submitting a franchise

agreement prior to the other?

A. If we had two agreements in front of us

that we had not acted, we would review both agreements.

Q. Again, you did review this agreement

because I'm looking, again, at page seven and it says

Miss Jacksonville and Miss River City Jacksonville, and

as we noted earlier in you testimony, and from the

minutes of the board, the River City franchise had

already been approved prior to the Miss Jacksonville

franchise being awarded?

A. That is what the minutes state.

Q. Is there any reason to not believe what the

minutes state?

A. I just don't know if there was a separate

one submitted with this additional one adding the second

title. I don't know the time sequence here of the

receipt between that River City and this one.

Q. Where do these franchise agreements come

from? Who generates them?

A. Franchise agreement is generated through --

it's written and drafted and confirmed by our attorney

and then generated out to the local pageants by Mary

Sullivan.

Q. So these would be agreements that are

drafted by Ray McLeod or are these agreements that come

from the Miss America organization itself?

A. The franchise agreement for the Miss

Florida pageant is specific to the Miss Florida pageant

making sure there are specific rules and regulations that

refer to Miss America if there is any Miss America rules

that apply as well. Then the state can adjust their

franchise as long as they don't violate any of the Miss

America standards direct to us. This document can also

be found in our website.

Q. I suppose everything that is in this

agreement has a purpose or a need; does it not?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form, no

foundation.

THE WITNESS: Otherwise, it wouldn't be

there.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. If you turn to page eight, right up at the

top there, there seems to be a necessity that this

agreement be sworn to and subscribed and acknowledged in

front of a notary.

A. Uh-huh.

Q. And that be acknowledged by the notary.

A. Correct.

Q. That is not filled in there.

A. There is a notary stamp on the previous

page, on page seven.

Q. Does that say anywhere around the notary or

the signature that it was sworn to and subscribed by the

applicant, Ruth Sidbury?

A. My understanding of the reason why the

notary puts their stamp and approves it is if they are

witnessing that person sign this document.

Q. And I would agree with you to a certain

extent. They, by their notarization witness that the

person that signed it is the person that signed it.

A. Correct.

Q. But that doesn't mean that the person

signing it has taken an oath or has sworn and attested to

the truth of the those documents unless that is

indicated, correct?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form, calls for a

legal conclusion.

THE WITNESS: All I can tell you, there is

a notary stamp right by Ruth's signature on page

seven.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. But there is not a notary signature on page

eight, which would indicate that anyone took an oath,

swore to, subscribed or acknowledged anything in this

franchise agreement; is that correct?

MR. BLOCK: Objection as to form.

THE WITNESS: That is correct.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Again, everything in this franchise

agreement is there for a reason and a purpose; is that

correct?

MR. BLOCK: Again, same objection.

THE WITNESS: Yes.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Do you know if the franchise agreement

submitted by the North Florida Scholarship Organization

was properly notarized, sworn to, subscribed and

affirmed?

A. I would have to see a copy of it.

Q. Do you know if that was even a

consideration with regards to whether or not you validly

had two franchise agreements for consideration in front

of you?

MR. BLOCK: Objection.

THE WITNESS: I would personally consider

this to be a valid franchise agreement.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Was this ever mentioned or brought up

before the executive board or the full board with regards

to the lack of a notary signature in the proper spot?

A. No, because as I stated, I would consider

this to be proper.

Q. Who made the decision, then, to consider

this a validly executed franchise agreement; you or Mary

or was this just overlooked?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: The executive board voted and

accepted this as a valid agreement.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Now, then, I think we have established by

your previous testimony and the minutes that the

executive board granted Ruth the franchise. In fact, was

publicly awarded the franchise at the franchise meeting

on October 14, 2006; is that correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. What is the date of the signature by Mary

Sullivan with regards to acceptance of the franchise

agreement?

A. It appear to say October 30th.

Q. That is 16 days after the alleged awarding

of the franchise to Ruth Sidbury and the Jacksonville

Scholarship Foundation; is that correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. In particular, and, again, this instrument

you acknowledge was drafted by the Miss Florida

organization or on behalf of Miss Florida organization.

It's signed by Mary E. Sullivan, it's president.

A. Correct.

Q. It's not signed or acknowledged by the

board of directors, is it?

A. It's signed by Mary with the authority from

the board. They are being approved by the board.

Q. It doesn't say that, does it?

A. No.

Q. And when she is dealing with people as the

president, you have already acknowledged she has certain

authority to deal with them and to negotiate with them;

is that correct?

MR. BLOCK: Objection to form.

THE WITNESS: She has authority to have

conversations with people, talk to people about

it, but, again, final approval of a franchise is

done by the executive board, which is what this

segment is that is accepted by the board of

directors of the Miss Florida pageant.

She would not sign this until it was voted

on by the executive board.

MR. SANDERS: That will be number 22.

(Thereupon, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 22 was

marked for Identification.)

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. At some point at the franchise meeting on

October 14th, did you and the executive board meet with

Kevin Sanders?

A. Yes, we did.

Q. What, if any, discussions were had from

that meeting?

A. The meeting with Kevin?

Q. Yes.

A. The executive board, which were present at

the time, Mary Sullivan, Rob Loy, myself and Kitty

Potapow met with Kevin during a break of the franchise

meeting. We met with Kevin to inform him that the

decision had been made to award the franchise for Miss

Jacksonville to Ruth Sidbury.

There was a discussion that ensued. Kevin

had some questions why that decision would be made. We

talked about things I have already stated, which dealt

with the posting to the website, the concern that would

indeed this pageant happen if it had been awarded, et

cetera.

Q. That meeting never occurred prior to the

executive board making that decision?

A. No, it did not.

Q. Do you recall any statements made to Kevin

Sanders with regards to his ability or the desire to

apply for a franchise in future years?

A. I think there was a statement, an

indication made that we would entertain consideration of

a franchise in the future once things in Kevin's personal

life or whatever had been going on that caused the issue

with the cancelation of the pageant, and however that

involved Cammie, and all those things that had been

happening, that with some time to be off, we even

indicated that we would be willing to entertain a

franchise for the future.

Q. So the executive board would consider

awarding a franchise to Kevin Sanders in the future, but

just not at that point in time?

A. That is correct.

Q. And that was based on a perceived -- I'm

just going to use your quoted words, "Some kind of

personal problems." What personal problems are you

referring to?

A. Well, what was posted on the website. The

way it was handled, the fact that the pageant was

canceled. There was reference to Cammie not wanting to

be involved anymore. Therefore, it was stated Kevin

didn't want to do this by himself, et cetera. That was

all part of the discussion.

Q. Has Kevin Sanders made application for a

Miss Florida franchise since 2006?

A. Yes, he has.

Q. How many times has Kevin Sanders made

application for a franchise with the Miss Florida

organization since 2006?

A. I think it would be twice.

Q. Would that be 2007 and 2008?

A. 2007-2008, 2008-2009.

Q. Was Kevin Sanders awarded a franchise to

the North Florida Scholarship Organization based on those

applications?

A. He was not.

Q. Why not?

A. Because there is a lawsuit pending, the

North Florida Scholarship Organization against the Miss

Florida organization.

Q. Why does that make a difference?

A. Because we did not feel it is in the Miss

Florida organization's best interest to award to a

franchise while there is a pending lawsuit against the

organization.

Q. Has that ever been stated in any rejection

of the franchise?

MR. BLOCK: I am going to object as to

relevance to this case.

MR. SANDERS: I think he has already made

it relevant based on what the executive board

said, but you can have your relevancy objection.

That is fine.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Has that ever been stated in a letter --

MR. BLOCK: I will direct him not to

answer. You can go to the judge on it. This is

not this case, and we are not going to let you set

up a second case, Kevin. Not in this deposition.

You can go to the judge.

MR. SANDERS: Okay. Certify that question.

That is fine.

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. Were those decisions made by the executive

board that you refer to by the full board or by you and

Mary?

MR. BLOCK: Objection. What are those

decisions?

BY MR. SANDERS:

Q. With regards to the 2007-2008 and 2008-2009

pageant?

MR. BLOCK: Direction not to answer.

MR. SANDERS: Certify that question.

MR. BLOCK: If you want to explain the

relevance to a breach of contract suit to the '06,

whatever year it was, '06 franchise, please do so

on the record, so we can have that education.

MR. SANDERS: I prefer to argue in front of

the judge. I know you well.

You instructed him not to answer, which is

a clear violation of the rules of civil procedure.

There is no privilege. I think you need to check

your case law. There is no privilege here. There

is no work product. There is nothing.

You cannot instruct this man not to answer

this question. I will be seeking sanctions to

include my air flight down here and my air flight

to come back down here to complete the deposition

unless you decide to change your mind. Otherwise,

I will take it to the judge.

MR. BLOCK: Kevin, if you can explain the

relevance to this case, discovery may be broad,

but it is not unlimited, and I believe you have

every intention of suing my client again. This is

a breach of contract for one year. That is all

this case is, and if you can explain it to me,

that would be fine, but you are --

MR. SANDERS: I don't have to explain it to

you. This is discovery. Anything is fair game in

discovery unless it's privileged or a

communication between attorney and client. There

is no case law that will support your position,

but I'll be glad to take it up.

MR. BLOCK: Now I see where our differences

are. I do believe there is a limit that the

Florida rules of civil procedure say. It has to

be relevant or lead to relevant evidence or

arguably lead to relevant evidence, and that is

what I'm pleading with you.

Tell me how this arguably leads to relevant

evidence? I don't see it. If you can explain it

to me, I could change my opinion, but I don't see

it.

MR. SANDERS: He has already said that the

executive board said they would receive an

application for a franchise from the North Florida

Scholarship Organization and Kevin Sanders. That

is what makes it relevant, and they have reviewed

those even though they have acknowledged that they

would receive those. That makes it relevant.

MR. BLOCK: Okay. I don't agree with your

argument, but you have explained your position. I

have asked that. I am willing to go to the judge.

MR. SANDERS: Okay. That is fine.