COUNT THREE
DERIVATIVE ACTION FOR LEGAL MALPRACTICE
AGAINST CLAYTON AND MCCULLOH
- WINDSOR adopts and realleges Paragraphs 1 through 505.
- CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS.
- Section 617.002 provides that the provisions of Chapter 607, the Florida General Corporation Act, apply to all nonprofit corporations.
- CLAYTON & MCCULLOH has been employed as the law firm representing the ASSOCIATION since April Fools’ Day 2015 (April 1, 2015). EXHIBIT 1538 is the contract titled “2015 ATTORNEY REPRESENTATION AGREEMENT FOR COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS.” [See SOF 44.] The ASSOCIATION retained CLAYTON & MCCULLOH to provide legal services in a competent fashion.
- At all times, the CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS held themselves out as competent in the area of law dealing with the legal work for which the ASSOCIATION retained the services of the CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS. When NEAL MCCULLOH spoke to the owners of the ASSOCIATION on March 5, 2020, he extolled the alleged expertise of CLAYTON & MCCULLOH, BRIAN, RUSSELL, and himself. He made it sound like CLAYTON & MCCULLOH was the best condominium association law firm in America.
- The ASSOCIATION and CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS acted under an attorney/client relationship in which CLAYTON & MCCULLOH undertook to represent the ASSOCIATION.
- The CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS were required to exercise the same duty of care as a reasonably competent attorney and to use reasonable care in determining and implementing a strategy to be followed to achieve the ASSOCIATION’s legal goals. As a fiduciary to the ASSOCIATION, the CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS were obligated to protect the ASSOCIATION.
- In the course of handling legal matters for the ASSOCIATION, the CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS negligently failed to act with the degree of competence generally possessed by attorneys in Florida who handle legal matters similar to the ASSOCIATION’s. The ASSOCIATION paid CLAYTON & MCCULLOH a substantial amount of money for the sole purpose of representing the ASSOCIATION in its legal matters.
- CLAYTON & MCCULLOH has neglected reasonable duties. CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS were negligent and/or committed malpractice and breached fiduciary duties to the ASSOCIATION, including in the following regard:
- By failing to explain the law to the ASSOCIATION;
- By failing to explain the terms of the ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, DECLARATION, and BYLAWS and the impact to the ASSOCIATION;
- By failing to ensure that the ASSOCIATION held lawful annual meetings and elections [See SOF 46, 47, 110, 151, and others];
- By concocting schemes to keep OMAR, VICKI, and KAREN as the Officers and Directors as part of an effort to conceal CLAYTON & MCCULLOH’s malpractice [See SOF 42, 100, 107, 173, and others];
- By preparing and filing a fraudulent BYLAW Amendment on January 15, 2019 in Lake County, Florida [See SOF 97-99, 107, 108, 127, 138, 149];
- By falsely and maliciously claiming the BYLAW regarding the annual meeting was amended on August 1, 2017 [See SOF 149, 151];
- By providing false legal information to ASSOCIATION owners, including WINDSOR;
- By running up legal fees by requiring that BRIAN Hess handle all of WINDSOR’s inquiries in writing [See SOF 124];
- By running up legal fees by refusing to meet with WINDSOR to resolve matters [See SOF 662];
- By running up legal fees to the ASSOCIATION and its members by failing to notify the D&O insurance carrier of litigation [See SOF 288];
- By running up legal fees by ignoring notices sent by WINDSOR in an effort to avoid further litigation [See SOF 122-123, 125, 218, 236, 238, 240, 245, 246, 251, 253, 254, 258, 261, 262, 263, 265, 271, 274, 284-287, 289-291, 303, and others];
- By running up legal fees by having NEAL MCCULLOH of CLAYTON & MCCULLOH tell WINDSOR to sue rather than agree to meet to try to resolve issues [See SOF 662];
- By running up legal fees by having RUSSELL Klemm of CLAYTON & MCCULLOH stall in a variety of ways rather than address the legal issues efficiently [See SOF 499];
- By running up legal fees by allowing the ASSOCIATION to pretend the BYLAWS were amended when they knew approval of all holders of first mortgage liens were required [See SOF 112 and others];
- By running up legal fees by failing to accept WINDSOR’s offer to withdraw his actions against the ASSOCIATION if CLAYTON & MCCULLOH and SENTRY refunded to the ASSOCIATION all money paid by to them from 2016 to 2019 [See SOF 283];
- By running up legal fees by failing to accept WINDSOR’s offer to withdraw his actions against the ASSOCIATION if the ASSOCIATION admitted and corrected all the wrongdoing [See SOF 334];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to charge exorbitant amounts for filing a Notice of Lien [See SOF 395];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate the Fair Credit Collection Act [See SOF 404];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Administrative Code Section 61B-23.002 (6) regarding Designated Voter Certificates [See SOF 61];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Administrative Code 61B-23.002 (8) regarding proxies [See SOF 120, 156, 171];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Administrative Code 61B-23.002 (9) by denying members the right to speak at meetings with respect to all designated agenda items;
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Administrative Code Section 61B-23.0021 (4) by failing to give proper notice of elections [See SOF 54, 55, 110, 114, 151, and others];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Administrative Code Section 61B-23.0021 (8) by failing to give proper notice of elections [See SOF 54, 55, 110, 114, 151, and others];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Administrative Code Section 61B-23.0021 (8) by failing to enforce the envelope procedure required at the purported March 22, 2019 election [See SOF 197];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Administrative Code Section 61B-23.001 (1) (d) by failing to notify owners of the unfilled board positions;
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Administrative Code Section 61B-23.0021 (8) by failing to notify owners of the unfilled board positions;
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Administrative Code Section 61B-23.0021 (8) by failing to send an amended notice following the withdrawal of Wendy Krauss [See SOF 48, 104-106];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Statute Section 718.112(2)(d) by failing to correct the problem after Wendy Krauss removed herself as a Board candidate [See SOF 104-106];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Administrative Code Section 61B-23.0028 (3) (b) by failing to file petitions for recall [See SOF 171];
- By claiming WINDSOR did not have the right to seek judicial proceedings pursuant to Section 718.1255 of the Florida Administrative Code Section 61B-45.043;
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Statute 718.104(4)(b) regarding the illegal name [See SOF 181];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Statute 718.111(c)(3) with improper claims of attorney-client privilege [See SOF 151];
- By allowing OMAR, VICKI, and KAREN to violate Florida Statute Section 718.111 (1) (q) regarding fiduciary duty [See SOF 151];
- By allowing OMAR, VICKI, and KAREN to violate Florida Statute Section 718.111 (1) (d) regarding fiduciary duty [See SOF 151];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Statute Section 718.111 (12) (6) by failing to maintain minutes of all meetings; [See SOF 166, 196, and many others.] [VERIFIED AFFIDAVIT OF WILLIAM M. WINDSOR DATED OCTOBER 27, 2020 (“AFFIDAVIT-2020-10-27”) ¶¶ 530, 600, 637, 729, 746, 753, 778, 779, 781, 788, 813, 950, 1006, 1063, 1068, 1375.]
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Statute Section 718.111 (12) (7) by failing to maintain current rosters [See SOF 49];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Statute Section 718.111 (12) (15) by failing to maintain written records;
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Statute Section 718.112 by failing to give at least 14 days’ notice of the annual meeting [See SOF 55];
- By causing and allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Statute Section 718.112 (1) (a) by not being governed as required by law [See SOF 151];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Statute Section 718.112 (1) (c) (1) by failing to post notice of meetings in a conspicuous place;
- By causing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Statute Section 718.112(2)(a)(2) regarding written inquiries and by providing false responses to written inquiries [See SOF 150, 151, 160, 161];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Statute Section 718.112 (2) (b) by failing to require a quorum [See SOF 121 and others];
- By causing and allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Statute Section 718.112(2)(c) by not allowing WINDSOR the right to speak at meetings with regard to all designated agenda items [See SOF 123, 151, 155, 302, 645];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Statute Section 718.112(2)(c)(1) by failing to post notice of the December 12, 2018 meeting and by claiming compliance with the statute [See SOF 151];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Statute Section 718.112(2)(d) by failing to hold annual meetings [See SOF 110 and others];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Statute Section 718.112(2)(d) by failing to post notice of the December 12, 2018 meeting and by claiming compliance with the statute [See SOF 151];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Statute Section 718.112(2)(d)(4) by failing to provide notice regarding annual elections in 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, or 2020 [See SOF 151, 110];
- petitions for arbitration over recalls [See SOF 171];
- Florida Statute Section
718.303 (5) by improperly suspending voting rights;
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate ARTICLES of Incorporation of the ASSOCIATION Article IV, Section 4.2 by failing to obtain certified copies of deeds [See SOF 53, 63, 69, 210, 331];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate ARTICLES of Incorporation of the ASSOCIATION Article VI, Officers by failing to elect Directors;
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 1.1 by showing a bogus address for the ASSOCIATION [See SOF 151];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 2.1 by failing to maintain current rosters [See SOF 49, 53];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 2.1 by failing to obtain certified copies of deeds;
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 2.2 regarding the annual meeting and election [See SOF 46, 47, 100, 110, 151, 486];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Law and BYLAW 2.2 by failing to hold annual meeting and annual election in 2020;
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 2.2 regarding the term for Directors [See SOF 46, 47, 151];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 2.3 regarding special members’ meetings [See SOF 141, 145];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 2.4 regarding conspicuous posting of notice of meetings [See SOF 54, 63, 64, 111, 117, 121, 151, 331];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 2.4 regarding notice of meetings [See SOF 54, 55, and others];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 2.5 regarding quorum [See SOF 52, 63, 331, and others;
- By causing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 2.6 regarding voting [See SOF 53, 151];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 2.6 regarding Designated Voters and quorum [See SOF 53, 151];
- By causing and allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 2.9 (b) regarding election of a Chairman [See SOF 192, 194, 206];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 2.9 (j) regarding election of Directors;
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 3.1 regarding the number of Directors;
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 3.2 regarding failure to consider nominations from the floor [See SOF 102 and others];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 3.2 a regarding election of Directors [ SOF 331];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 3.2 b regarding use of a nominating committee [See SOF 63, 101];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 3.3 regarding term of service for Directors;
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 3.4 regarding organizational meetings [See SOF 63, 103, 331];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 3.5 regarding organizational meetings [See SOF 103];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 3.6 regarding special meetings;
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 3.12 regarding election of officers [See SOF 100];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 5.1 by failing to elect an Assistant Secretary [AFFIDAVIT-2020-10-27 ¶¶ 15, 304, 328, 329, 347, 373, 403, 465, 466, 468];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAWS 6.1 and 6.2 regarding accounts classification [See SOF 151];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 8.2 regarding Bylaw amendment;
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate BYLAW 8.3 regarding consent of mortgage holders [See SOF 63, 97, 112, 138, 331, 525];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate DECLARATION Paragraph 13.3 regarding the number of Voting Interests [See SOF 51, 52, 59, 181, 331];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate DECLARATION Paragraph 18.1 regarding amendment;
- By claiming the ASSOCIATION had Rules limiting the right to speak [See SOF 151 and EXHIBIT E];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to unlawfully increase assessments to the members [See SOF 39];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to vote to unlawfully increase assessments to the members to as much as $962.38 per month at the purported December 12, 2018 meeting [See SOF 39];
- By facilitating repeated violations of the corporate governing documents and Florida statutes [See SOF 40 – 510];
- By counseling purported officers and directors to ignore demands for them to cease pretending to be officers and directors [See SOF 42, 137, 164];
- By failing to update the corporate governing documents [See SOF 45];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to pretend the BYLAW was amended on August 25, 2018 after RUSSELL E. KLEMM sent a letter to the ASSOCIATION c/o CHARLIE ANN of SENTRY in which he stated amendments require approval of all holders of first mortgage liens [See SOF 112];
- RUSSELL E. KLEMM has committed many violations of the Florida Rules of Professional Conduct while fighting WINDSOR; he has committed perjury, fraud on the court, and many other violations while C&M has obtained over $130,000 in legal fee payments from the ASSOCIATION [See SOF 499];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to violate Florida Law and the governing documents by failing to hold annual meeting and annual election in 2017 when there was not a quorum [See SOF 51, 52, 59, 63, 104, 107, 137, 331, 525];
- OMAR, VICKI, and KAREN were not lawfully elected, so they had no authority to schedule meetings [See SOF 118, 137];
- By denying owners a special meeting to consider a substitute budget [See SOF 145];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to hire police to attend ASSOCIATION meetings by falsely claiming police were needed because of WINDSOR threats to do physical harm or kill people. WINDSOR did no such thing [See SOF 119, 204];
- By authorizing the ASSOCIATION to disregard the votes and proxies submitted in advance by owners on December 12, 2018. WINDSOR objected. BRIAN Hess of CLAYTON & MCCULLOH ignored him and facilitated this wrongdoing. [See SOF 120];
- By authorizing the ASSOCIATION to conduct the purported December 12, 2018 meeting when it was void for a variety of reasons. [See SOF 121];
- By authorizing the ASSOCIATION to conduct a purported January 16, 2019 meeting that was not legal because OMAR, VICKI, and KAREN were not legally elected as directors. [See SOF 139];
- By causing the value of the condos of ASSOCIATION members to decline due to the legal problems [See SOF 143];
- By ignoring requests from an ASSOCIATION member in an effort to determine what was needed to accept the signatures of Nancy Camp and Jane O’Steen for the Nielsen Trust. [See SOF 148];
- By claiming the BYLAWS provide that reserves are to be allocated to a specific use [See SOF 151];
- By claiming the BYLAWS restrict ASSOCIATION owners to speak three minutes total at meetings [See SOF 151];
- By causing the ASSOCIATION to violate the BYLAWS by disregarding valid proxies [See SOF 151];
- By claiming DECLARATION 12.2 gives the Board the power to increase dues for repairs and maintenance [See SOF 151];
- By causing and/or allowing the ASSOCIATION, OMAR, VICKI, and KAREN to violate Florida Statue Section 617.0830 and 617.0834 by committing the crime of fraud and perhaps other crimes [See SOF 151];
- By authorizing the ASSOCIATION to disregard the defamation directed at WINDSOR. [See SOF 137, 153, 154];
- By failing to comply with the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure [See SOF 499];
- By managing a purported December 12, 2018 meeting that was void [See SOF 121]
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION, SENTRY, and CHARLIE ANN to announce false voting results at the December 12, 2018 meeting [See SOF 151, 167, 209, 216];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to repeatedly produce a bogus set of minutes for a purported meeting for August 2017 [See SOF 51];
- By causing COACH HOUSES MEMBER Defendants and the ASSOCIATION to ignore notices of violations and wrongdoing and demands to rectify. [See SOF 42, 122, 123, 125, 126, 137, 151, 157, 167, 168, 179, 180, 182, 189, 226, 227, 229, 235, 237, 238, 240, 242, 244-246, 248, 251, 253, 254, 258, 261, 263, 265, 270-272, 274, 275, 283-285, 288-291, 295-297, 303, 308, 309, 315, 319, 320, 327, 329-331, 334, 358-360, 363, 371, 376, 386, 391, 392, 394, 396-406, 410, 461, 486, 489, 491, 492, 498, and others.]
- By causing the ASSOCIATION to fail to file Petitions for Recall Arbitration [See SOF 156, 171];
- By causing the ASSOCIATION to deny the election / recall on February 4, 2019 and February 19, 2019 [See SOF 155, 156, 170];
- By causing the ASSOCIATION to fail to produce Records requested for Inspection [See SOF 175 -176] [EXHIBITS 1853, 1857];
- By allowing the ASSOCIATION to hold a purported March 22, 2019 meeting and election due to fraud as well as other violations [See SOF 195, 210];
- By ignoring a February 23, 2019 certified letter from WINDSOR advising CLAYTON & MCCULLOH of a variety of wrongful acts. There was no response. [See SOF 177.]
- By concealing Designated Voter Certificates at the purported March 22, 2019 meetings that would have shown several to be invalid; [See SOF 202.]
- By falsifying information sent to the DBPR [See SOF 310, 323, 324];
- By holding themselves out as the attorneys for the ASSOCIATION but not representing the best interests of the ASSOCIATION;
- By taking large sums of money from the ASSOCIATION;
- By failing to provide the ASSOCIATION with the minimum standard of care.
- In addition to the negligence and/or malpractice committed by CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS as shown herein, upon information and belief, the C&M DEFENDANTS fraudulently induced the ASSOCIATION to pay large sums of money by making representations regarding the legal issues that were not true.
- The ASSOCIATION performed all conditions, covenants, and promises required on their part in accordance with the 2015 Attorney Representation Agreement for Community Associations, with the exception of those conditions which the ASSOCIATION was prevented and/or relieved from performing by the acts and omissions of the CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS. Implicit in the contract for legal services was the requirement to perform such services competently and to not require payment for incompetent services, to not bill excessively or dishonestly, and to not require payment of excessive or dishonest bills, and for the CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS to comply with the Rules of Professional Conduct (and other applicable laws) in the provision of their services and to not require payment of services violating the Rules of Professional Conduct or other applicable laws. The CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS breached the 2015 Attorney Representation Agreement for Community Associations by failing to provide competent services. As a direct and proximate result of CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS incompetence and contractual breaches, the ASSOCIATION has suffered damages and should suffer significant damages in this case.
- A client’s retention of a law firm gives rise to a fiduciary relationship between the parties. The scope of an attorney’s fiduciary obligations are determined as a matter of law. These fiduciary duties include duties of care and loyalty, an obligation to the ASSOCIATION.
- In breach of their fiduciary duties and professional responsibilities to the ASSOCIATION, the CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS committed the wrongful acts and omissions shown herein.
- As the ASSOCIATION’s attorneys, the CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS also owed a duty to comply with Florida Rules of Professional Conduct and not to unreasonably or excessively bill the ASSOCIATION. The CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS’ fiduciary duties to the ASSOCIATION also included the obligation that the CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS would perform the legal services in an efficient and cost effective manner, would not pad or engage in deceptive and abusive billing practices, would charge litigation costs and expenses to the ASSOCIATION at their own cost and without increase, and that the CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS would exercise their fiduciary duty in respect to their fees, billings and costs charged. The CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS breached their fiduciary duties to the ASSOCIATION by unreasonably and excessively billing the ASSOCIATION for the ultimately incompetent legal services performed which caused hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages to the ASSOCIATION and its members. As a direct and proximate result of the CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS’ various fiduciary breaches, the ASSOCIATION has suffered compensatory damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
- In doing the things herein alleged, the CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS intentionally put their own financial interests ahead of the interests of their client. As a direct and proximate result of the C&M DEFENDANTS’ actions, as alleged herein, the ASSOCIATION incurred substantial unnecessary fees and costs, in an amount subject to proof.
- The legal work was mishandled from the start of CLAYTON & MCCULLOH’s representation and the mishandling by the CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS began almost immediately after C&M was retained.
- The C&M DEFENDANTS, and each of them, failed to exercise reasonable care and skill in their representation of the ASSOCIATION by negligently and carelessly doing all of the acts and omissions as herein alleged.
- The CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS, and each of them, owed the ASSOCIATION a fiduciary duty to act at all times in good faith and in the ASSOCIATION’s best interests, and had a duty, among other things, to perform the services for which they were retained with reasonable care and skill, to act in the ASSOCIATION’s highest and best interests at all times, and to not expose the ASSOCIATION to any unnecessary risk or peril. This fiduciary and confidential relationship was never repudiated by the C&M DEFENDANTS at any time herein mentioned.
- The CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS, and each of them, breached their fiduciary duties and obligations to the ASSOCIATION by doing all of the acts and omissions as herein alleged.
- WINDSOR demands judgment of and from CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS for compensatory damages in an amount to be proven at trial; special damages as permitted by law; pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as permitted by law; and for such other relief as the Court deems necessary or proper.
- Furthermore, in doing all of the above described acts and omissions constituting Defendants’ breach of their fiduciary duties owed to the ASSOCIATION, the ASSOCIATION sustained damages, including but not limited to, legal fees incurred to C&M in the amount of over $130,000, the ASSOCIATION sustained further and additional economic and out of pocket losses and damages to be presented at trial, all according to proof.
The acts and omissions constituting breach of the CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS’ fiduciary duties were committed with oppression, fraud and/or malice. As a result, ASSOCIATION, in addition to actual damages, may recover exemplary damages for the sake of example and by way of punishing the CLAYTON & MCCULLOH DEFENDANTS.
Click here for links to the entire lawsuit, by section
NEAL MCCULLOH is one of the two senior partners with CLAYTON & MCCULLOH.
He likes his bangs apparently.
KENNETH M. CLAYTON is the other senior partner at CLAYTON & MCCULLOH.
You have to wonder if he once had bangs, too.
CLAYTON AND MCCULLOH appears to be a tiny law firm with the two “senior partners” and one or two other attorneys.
Christine Praria is legal assistant to Russell E. Klemm.
She seems to think she’s running the show.