Attorney Scott Danks has sent a letter the the Indiana Board of Accounts demanding the details surrounding the anonymous call that erupted into an article in the Evansville Courier and Press regarding the credentials of Mr. David Garrett for the performance of a financial analysis for the Evansville City Council. In the letter, Danks cites the disclosures already reported to have been made by the Board of Accounts to have waived the customary confidentiality that is typically kept when individual professional reputations are potentially compromised.
Below is the letter without comment, edit, or bias.
February 13, 2013
Brian Cusimano
Compliance Director
Indiana Board of Accountancy
402 West Washington St., Room W072
Indianapolis, IN 46204
RE: David W. Garrett
Dear Mr. Cusimano:
Thank you for your letter of February 11, 2013 concerning Mr. David W. Garrett. As Mr. Garrett’s attorney, I am again demanding that you supply me with the nature of the “complaint†made against Mr. Garrett, the date of the “complaint†and the identity of the individual who made the “complaint.†This information is, of course, necessary for Mr. Garrett to respond to any allegations made against him.
In your refusal to provide said information, you cite Indiana Code § 25-2.1-9-2(c) which states “the report of the investigating officer, the complaint, if any, the testimony and documents submitted in support of the complaint or gathered in the investigation, and the fact of the pendency of the investigation are confidential information…†You were quoted in a front page news article in Evansville Courier & Press on February 8, 2013 stating “other people held him out as†a Certified Public Accountant and “we’re still investigating it right now, so I can’t say one way or the other†whether Garrett claimed to be an active CPA.
The newspaper report also indicates that based upon the reporter’s conversation with you that “an Evansville City Councilman misrepresented the professional credentials of a friend while urging fellow council members to hire him as an outside auditor, according to a complaint now under investigation by State officials.â€
There is a very good reason for the statute. False, unfounded and malicious allegations should not be made public unless they are found, after an investigation, to be true. Otherwise, as in Mr. Garrett’s case, a person wrongfully accused can be defamed.
It is our position that any confidentiality has been waived by the Indiana Board of Accountancy due to your violation of the statute by giving statements to the news media confirming that a “complaint†had been filed and the nature of the allegation.
Your continued refusal to supply the requested information will result in Mr. Garrett seeking judicial remedies in this matter.
Your prompt response to this letter would be very much appreciated.
Very truly yours,
DANKS & DANKS
Go Gettem Danks! Can’t wait to see who the complainer was. I got my money on Mosby.
If a city council member slanders a persons reputation and gets sued in a court of law WHO PAYS THE SETTLEMENT the council member or the taxpayer , who paid the court settlement when our past accessor illegally fired some of his employees……out of curiosity
Who paid the settlement when Weinzapfel forced Marilee Fowler out at the CVB causing them to have to cough up darn near $40k for his politically driven dirtbaggery? If Weaver was speaking as a councilman the city council will get stuck with the bill. They better hope they have good malpractice insurance because ruining a career will be many times $40k. How much is 10 years of an educated person’s time worth?
Mr. Danks, keep up the good work!
Speaking of taxpayers paying for public employees screw ups, what happened with the guy who EPD sicked the dogs on for doing his job? It may not be settled yet but I sure do hope news outlets follow up on how much money Barney Fife is costing us in that and other cases.
Scott Danks should not be representing Garratt. He is the City Attorney and may have to defend the City on this matter. He should know better that. He is over reacting just like John Friend has on this matter. Boys there is a lot bigger fish to fry than this situation–you all need to move on.
Mr Danks IS NOT the city attorney, he is the city Council attorney, I believe Mr Zeimer (sp) is the city attorney.
JMHO
Yeah…nothing to see here boys…our government has this under control…move on…move on. LOL!
Dear Johnboy….
You are absolutely correct about bigger fish to fry. If this Administration has been floundering in the controller’s office and the SBOA issues an adverse report [FAILED] while being distracted about prior verese current CPA certificates, we are being very foolish and wasting valuable time. This Administration never wanted the council to select Garrett because as a private citizens, hasn’t he requested numerous “Freedom of Information Acts” request, such as the Arena vouchers for September of 2011 while under the control of the prior administration and April of 2012, under the Winnecke admininstration whereby the documents clearly indicated payments marked “North Campus.” The total amounting to $1.6 million dollars, but, yet, this administration takes the credit for discovering the diversion. Investigate the timing of the request by Garrett and compare to the correction by the bank. If this is not convincing, then request the email traffic between DMD and the bank, you will not be able to find. The message of this is this Administration must be working in denial and secrecy. Divert the message about some silly word “is” and “was” and make us confused and deflected about how Standard & Poors may altermately grade our future bonding request. Yes, Johnboy, we differently have bigger fish to fry, hopefully, it is not the City’s future.
Danks is only representing Garrett against the State Board of Accountancy at the request of several Council Members. Obviously, if the person who made the false allegations against Garrett is a city official and Garrett wants to pursue legal action against the City, Danks would have a conflict of interest and Garrett would need to employ someone else to represent him. Both Danks and Garrett are aware of this.
I have met Garrett before. Worked with him on a project in Henderson. To look at him, you would think…average Joe. But if you sit down and talk to him, you would find that he is a very smart man. It’s too bad that he got caught in the political trap here in Evansville…and for $20,000. I think he is getting ripped off.
I SUPPORT LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE CITY OF EVANSVILLE, and understand that theirs is a difficult job. The recent stories below, while unrelated, do in a way lead this reader to wonder if subtle changes in Police/City policy, training and discipline, could result in fewer lawsuits, more respect for LEO’S/City leaders and better outcomes for all involved.
_____
“Grandmother sues city, police department over June flash grenade†incident
http://www.courierpress.com/news/2013…
Some seem to fear that Louise Milan might “get rich†from this lawsuit. If she does, good for her, however, the important factor is that punitive damages, well beyond the damages caused to her home that day, might prevent the recurrence of these kinds of dangerous home invasions in the future. IMHO, If improper actions were taken during the raid of her home, they were not taken only against her and her Granddaughter, but against the Citizenry as a whole.
_____
“UPDATE: Armed man escorted from zoo by police sues city of Evansville | PDFâ€
http://www.courierpress.com/news/2011…
THE MAGENHEIMER LAWSUIT
IMHO, when uniformed members of the EPD asked Mr Magenheimer to cover his handgun at Mesker Zoo, then escorted him out, they violated his right as a properly licensed Hoosier to carry openly on public property. Only punitive damages will prevent the recurrence of similar incidents.
_____
Personal observation:
Burdette Park and Aquatic Center, Park Rule #4 declares
“Firearms Prohibited†… IMHO, a clear violation of SB292 which prohibits Municipalities from enforcing laws which are in conflict with State Laws regarding the regulation of firearms. (paraphrased)
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sho…
_____
“UPDATE: Sheriff’s office says deputies tried to shock man before fatally shooting him” http://www.courierpress.com/news/2012…
Mr Lindal M. Johnson, a known mentally ill man, died in an incident that, IMHO, was unfortunate and perhaps poorly handled. (will a lawsuit result?)
_____
Will Mr Garrett have to “get in line” with a long list of plaintiffs against the City of Evansville?
_____
Again:
I SUPPORT LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE CITY OF EVANSVILLE, and understand that theirs is a difficult job. The recent stories above, while unrelated, do in a way lead this reader to wonder if subtle changes in Police/City policy, training and discipline, could result in fewer lawsuits, more respect for LEO’S/City leaders and better outcomes for all involved.
Respectfully
Editor PLEASE NOTE:
In the lead in to Danks letter, twice you refer to the State Board of Accounts. Mr. Danks properly addressed his letter to the State Board of Accountancy.
The boards are not the same. Each has its own duties, responsibilities and IDENTITY.
If the complaint was actually filed by an anonymous call, then they won’t know who did it.
I bet they can trace what number it came from.
Comments are closed.