Veach, Murphy Must Provide Discovery

On Thursday, Judge Keith Kyle ruled that former Mayor Ray Murphy and former Council member Bill Veach must provide a limited amount of discovery in the defamation lawsuit filed against them by Karen Woodson and John King.

Murphy and Veach have asked Kyle to dismiss the case calling it an anti-SLAPP lawsuit. An anti-SLAPP law is a legal mechanism that allows defendants to quickly dismiss meritless lawsuits aimed at silencing public participation and free speech. SLAPP stands for “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.” Veach and Murphy argue that this lawsuit is a violation of their 1st amendment rights. 

Woodson and King filed the defamation lawsuit against Murphy and Veach alleging they lied about them when gathering signatures for the recall. Veach and Murphy were the co-chairs of the recall committee. 

Kyle set a June 2nd court date to hear the motion to dismiss. He also also ordered the two sides to go to mediation before June 2nd to try to get this resolved or the case could wind up costing both sides tens of thousands of dollars if it goes to trial. Kyle said, “It would be foolish not to sit down with a mediator before the end of the month”

Veach and Murphy asked Kyle for a”blanket prohibition” on all discovery until the motion to dismiss was ruled on. Kyle refused to grant them that request. 

The limited discovery questions Veach and Murphy now have to answer are mostly related to proving the allegations in the recall petition. It’s important to note that the allegations the recallers made against Woodson and King did not need to be proven inside the recall process. They just needed to fit the criteria of the state statute, which they did, other than one portion of the recall petition against King. A judge ruled that due to that flaw King’s entire petition was flawed and he tossed it. Both King and Woodson were recalled by the voters, however, King was able to keep his seat due to the judge’s ruling. 

Here are the discovery questions Veach and Murphy must now answer before June 2nd. We plan to be in the court room on June 2nd if the hearing moves forward. Judge Kyle set 3 hours aside to hear the case (2PM to 5PM) 

1. All drafts of the Recall Petition. 
2. All documents, including communications, which you believe support the allegation that “John King engaged in private conversations to coordinate with Karen Woodson in soliciting a replacement Town Attorney in violation of Florida’s Government-in-theSunshine Law, Chapter 286, Florida Statutes, and in violation of the Town of Fort Myers Beach Town Council Policies and Procedures Manual,” as claimed in the Recall Petition. 
3. All documents, including communications, evidencing King and Karen Woodson engaged in private conversations regarding the solicitation of a replacement Town Attorney. 
4. All documents, including communications, which you believe support the allegation that “John King received unreported gifts of meals from parties who were seeking land use approvals from Town Council in violation of Florida’s Code of Ethics for Public Officers, Chapter 112, Florida Statutes, and in violation of the Town of Fort Myers Beach Town Council Policies and Procedures Manual,” as claimed in the Recall Petition.
5. A copy of the Fort Myers Beach Town Council Policies and Procedures Manual, as referred to in the Recall Petition. 
6. All documents, including communications, which you believe support the allegation that “John King violated Section 4.04 of the Town Charter by dictating the removal of multiple Town contract employees,” as claimed to in the Recall Petition. 
7. A copy of the Town Charter, as referred to in the Recall Petition. 
8. All documents evidencing any misfeasance or malfeasance by King while acting in his capacity as Councilor for the Town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida. 
9. All communications between you and anyone else regarding any misfeasance or malfeasance by King while acting in his capacity as Councilor for the Town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida. 10. All communications between Veach and anyone else which you believe support the allegations against King in the Complaint.