FW: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
584 views
Skip to first unread message
lnc-public_forward
Sep 23, 2025, 11:32:58 AMSep 23
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 3:32:38 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
We have an LNC email ballot. Votes are due to the LNC List on this email thread by 11:59 pm Pacific Time on September 30th, 2025.
Motion:
LNC to ratify prior decision to direct counsel to seek dismissal of the lawsuit Vest v. LNC, and further direct Chairman Nekhaila to continue that course of action, as per the recommendation by vote of the Executive Committee.
Co-Sponsors: Chair Nekhaila
Vote Threshold Required: Majority
Secretary’s Notes: None
Vote Tracker: https://tinyurl.com/092325VEST
lnc-public_forward
Sep 23, 2025, 11:39:25 AMSep 23
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 3:39:12 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Yes
Travis L. Bost
LNC At-Large
Travi...@LP.org
From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 11:32:38 AM
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 11:32:38 AM
To: lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
lnc-public_forward
Sep 23, 2025, 11:40:18 AMSep 23
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 3:40:09 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
I vote Aye.
Sincerely,
Steven Nekhaila
Chairman, LNC
Sincerely,
Steven Nekhaila
Chairman, LNC
From: Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 11:39 AM
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 11:39 AM
lnc-public_forward
Sep 23, 2025, 11:47:06 AMSep 23
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 3:46:52 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
As I have known Beth for over a decade and consider her a friend, I feel it would not be proper for me to vote on this item.
I will defer to Jessi on this vote.
Keith Thompson
Region 3 South Rep
From: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 10:40 AM
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 10:40 AM
lnc-public_forward
Sep 23, 2025, 12:53:39 PMSep 23
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Doug Knebel <doug....@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 4:53:29 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
I vote yes.
Doug Knebel
LNC At-Large
From: Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 11:46 AM
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 11:46 AM
lnc-public_forward
Sep 23, 2025, 1:51:54 PMSep 23
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 5:51:41 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Doug Knebel <doug....@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
This item of business is too important for sneaking it through an email ballot, and it is morally wrong to try to shove this important and substantial matter down our throats without debate or discussion— especially since the legal strategy had been previously
unauthorized.
This is sleezy, shady, and corrupt. Why not just put this into the upcoming meeting?
Austin Martin
R1
Join the fight and support the removal of Socialists from the LP by donating at the link below:
From: Doug Knebel <doug....@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 6:53:29 AM
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 6:53:29 AM
lnc-public_forward
Sep 23, 2025, 1:53:44 PMSep 23
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Jessi Cowart <jessi....@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 5:53:35 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
I vote YES on behalf of R3 South.
Get
Outlook for iOS
From: Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 10:46:52 AM
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 10:46:52 AM
lnc-public_forward
Sep 23, 2025, 2:04:16 PMSep 23
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 6:04:02 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Jessi Cowart <jessi....@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
lnc-public_forward
Sep 23, 2025, 2:57:50 PMSep 23
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Ben Weir <ben....@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 6:57:42 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Jessi Cowart <jessi....@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
I think this should be discussed and not reduced to an email ballot.
If Mr. Ford doesn't vote on this, I will vote no.
From: Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 2:04:02 PM
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 2:04:02 PM
lnc-public_forward
Sep 23, 2025, 3:08:08 PMSep 23
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Robert Vinson <robert...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 7:08:00 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Yes.
Sincerely,
Robert Vinson, Esq.
Libertarian National Committee Director At Large
Libertarian Party of Florida
Email: robert...@lp.org | Phone: 8505128538
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”
-
Thomas Jefferson
From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 10:32 AM
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 10:32 AM
To: lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
lnc-public_forward
Sep 23, 2025, 3:40:31 PMSep 23
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Bill Redpath <bill.r...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 7:40:17 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Robert Vinson <robert...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
lnc-public_forward
Sep 23, 2025, 4:13:40 PMSep 23
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 8:13:30 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Reminder to all members that per the PM, please refrain from engaging in debate and/or discussion in an email ballot thread.
|
|||||||||||
|
|
lnc-public_forward
Sep 23, 2025, 4:20:49 PMSep 23
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Meredith Hays <meredi...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 8:20:34 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
After conferring with my region chair, R4 votes YES.
From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 1:13:30 PM
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 1:13:30 PM
lnc-public_forward
Sep 23, 2025, 5:01:57 PMSep 23
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Sam Bohler <samuel...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 9:01:48 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Meredith Hays <meredi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
I vote Aye
|
|
lnc-public_forward
Sep 23, 2025, 6:08:17 PMSep 23
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 10:08:04 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Sam Bohler <samuel...@lp.org>; Meredith Hays <meredi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
I vote yes.
Respectfully,
Paul Darr
Vice Chair, Libertarian National Committee
From: Sam Bohler <samuel...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 4:01 PM
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 4:01 PM
lnc-public_forward
Sep 23, 2025, 8:20:44 PMSep 23
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Jonathan McGee <jonatha...@lp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2025 12:20:35 AM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>; Sam Bohler <samuel...@lp.org>; Meredith Hays <meredi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
I vote Yes.
Jonathan McGee
Region 2 Representative, Libertarian National Committee
Executive Director, Libertarian Party of Alabama
From: Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 5:08 PM
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 5:08 PM
lnc-public_forward
Sep 24, 2025, 6:09:44 PMSep 24
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Andrew Watkins <andrew....@lp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2025 10:09:31 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Jonathan McGee <jonatha...@lp.org>; Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>; Sam Bohler <samuel...@lp.org>; Meredith Hays <meredi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
lnc-public_forward
Sep 24, 2025, 6:12:45 PMSep 24
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Otto Dassing <otto.d...@lp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2025 10:12:37 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Andrew Watkins <andrew....@lp.org>; Jonathan McGee <jonatha...@lp.org>; Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>; Sam Bohler <samuel...@lp.org>; Meredith Hays <meredi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
abstain
From: Andrew Watkins <andrew....@lp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2025 6:09:31 PM
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2025 6:09:31 PM
lnc-public_forward
Sep 29, 2025, 2:09:44 AMSep 29
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2025 6:09:34 AM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Otto Dassing <otto.d...@lp.org>; Andrew Watkins <andrew....@lp.org>; Jonathan McGee <jonatha...@lp.org>; Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>; Sam Bohler <samuel...@lp.org>; Meredith Hays <meredi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
I raise the following points of order:
Point of Order: Continuing this vote violates Policy Manual Section 1.07.4.C.II - Duty of Care. The LNC majority is collaborating to deny necessary legal advice until after the close of this ballot. The withholding of this legal advice prevents the LNC from
making a properly informed decision regarding the ratification of an unauthorized legal strategy already executed.
Point of Order: Continuing this vote violates Policy Manual Section 1.07.4.C.III - Duty of Loyalty. LNC members are required to take utmost care to avoid conflicts of interest that could jeopardize their ability to act in the best interest of the LNC. Multiple
LNC members have documented conflicts of interest affecting their independence.
Point of Order: Continuing this vote violates Policy Manual Section 1.07.4.C.IV - Duty of Good Faith. There has been a sustained pattern of rushed action, suppression, and censorship of debate, improper revocation of access, documented negligence, evasive legal
counsel, unjust obstruction of access to legal counsel, retaliatory action against whistleblowers, execution of unauthorized legal action, secret meetings with opposing parties in the lawsuit, and more. This motion appears to be an attempt to ratify their
own misconduct and is, by its nature, in bad faith.
Andrew Chadderdon
Region 1 Rep | Libertarian National Committee
From: Otto Dassing <otto.d...@lp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2025 6:12:37 PM
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2025 6:12:37 PM
lnc-public_forward
Sep 30, 2025, 1:24:32 PMSep 30
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2025 5:24:19 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Otto Dassing <otto.d...@lp.org>; Andrew Watkins <andrew....@lp.org>; Jonathan McGee <jonatha...@lp.org>; Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>; Sam Bohler <samuel...@lp.org>; Meredith Hays <meredi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Mr. Chadderdon,
I shall respond to each of your points of order as follows:
1) Duty of Care
The claim that the LNC is “collaborating to deny legal advice” is not substantiated. The duty of care requires members to make reasonable, informed decisions in good faith under the circumstances. Members have received sufficient notice and information to deliberate
and vote. Furthermore, this strategy has been brought up and discussed with Counsel as it developed, going back as far as Q4 of last year when the strategy was originally adopted under my predecessor, and continues to this day.
Per the request of colleagues, we had a multi-hour online meeting, preceded and followed by answers to additional questions. I would also note that Mr. Hall is only our general counsel, Ackerman is representing us in this case.
Any individual member’s disagreement with the amount or timing of legal advice does not constitute a breach of duty of care or a parliamentary defect in continuing the ballot.
2) Duty of Loyalty
Alleged “conflicts of interest” have not been demonstrated in a manner that meets the standards of conflict under either our bylaws or law.
Members are permitted to have perspectives, past affiliations, and relationships; what constitutes a conflict is a direct, material, personal interest in the outcome.
None has been formally established or recognized here. Thus, there is no violation of the duty of loyalty.
3) Duty of Good Faith
The recitation of grievances, characterizations of debate management, or dissatisfaction with prior votes does not rise to the level of a breach of fiduciary good faith.
Good faith is measured by whether actions are taken with the sincere belief that they are in the best interest of the organization. There is no evidence to the contrary in the conduct of this ballot.
Accordingly, under Robert’s Rules of Order, none of these points demonstrate that the pending vote is out of order. The ballot continues in order.
Sincerely,
Steven Nekhaila
Chairman, LNC
From: Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2025 2:09 AM
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2025 2:09 AM
lnc-public_forward
Sep 30, 2025, 1:53:48 PMSep 30
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2025 5:53:37 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Jessi Cowart <jessi....@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Point of order:
The motion to ratify must be explicit and cannot combine multiple business items. The current motion combines multiple distinct business items for ratification. Each separate motion to Dismiss would require a separate ratification, rather than attempting to
legitimize multiple past ultra-vires actions.
In addition to other points which may be raised, this vote, the procedure, and the tactical intent to bypass committee discussion to ratify misconduct, violates our statement of principles and constitutes misrepresentation and obfuscation. Additionally, some
of the ratification items would be moot (such as the prior motion to Dismiss, along with a previous IC which was found by a court to lack independence due to mere caucus association, without the actual personal interests attending the current SIC-related strategy;
these are distinct). Each item should be considered separately. The instant question is not a continuation of the same 2024 motion, but an entirely different motion, and an entirely different legal strategy. Conflating the two is both misleading and out of
order.
Furthermore, Mr. Chadderdon is correct that the ratification of misconduct on this board presents a direct refutation to the assumption of good faith, especially in the present circumstances. The use of an email ballot to bypass debate further aggravates this
dynamic. The new information showing intentional failures to disclose severe conflicts of interest by Redpath and other members, along with conflicts of interest with General Counsel has also not been addressed and raises serious concerns about validating
the strategy. Stifling debate and rushing to judgement is out of order.
Mahalo!
Austin Martin
R1
Join the fight and support the removal of Socialists from the LP by donating at the link below:
From: Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 8:04:02 AM
To: Jessi Cowart <jessi....@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 8:04:02 AM
To: Jessi Cowart <jessi....@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
To: Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
I vote YES on behalf of R3 South.
Get
Outlook for iOS
To: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
As I have known Beth for over a decade and consider her a friend, I feel it would not be proper for me to vote on this item.
I will defer to Jessi on this vote.
Keith Thompson
Region 3 South Rep
From: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 10:40 AM
To: Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
I vote Aye.
Sincerely,
Steven Nekhaila
Chairman, LNC
To: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Yes
Travis L. Bost
LNC At-Large
Travi...@LP.org
From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 11:32:38 AM
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 11:32:38 AM
To: lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
lnc-public_forward
Sep 30, 2025, 3:40:14 PMSep 30
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2025 7:40:00 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Mr. Martin,
As it has been explained to you previously in meetings and via email (see public email to you from the
Secretary Caryn Ann Harlos on June 27, 2025), alternates cannot make motions including points of order. You can request your region rep make the point of order or other motions.
From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2025 1:53 PM
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2025 1:53 PM
lnc-public_forward
Sep 30, 2025, 3:40:59 PMSep 30
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2025 7:40:46 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
I vote to Abstain.
From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 11:32 AM
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 11:32 AM
To: lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
lnc-public_forward
Sep 30, 2025, 3:42:21 PMSep 30
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2025 7:42:00 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
I may decide to appeal this holding.
Participation of alts is not something to discourage.
I do not withdraw my point, and I call for others to join it.
Austin Martin
R1
Join the fight and support the removal of Socialism from the LP by donating at the link below:
From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2025 9:40:00 AM
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2025 9:40:00 AM
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Mr. Martin,
As it has been explained to you previously in meetings and via email (see public email to you from the
Secretary Caryn Ann Harlos on June 27, 2025), alternates cannot make motions including points of order. You can request your region rep make the point of order or other motions.
To: Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Jessi Cowart <jessi....@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>;
Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Point of order:
The motion to ratify must be explicit and cannot combine multiple business items. The current motion combines multiple distinct business items for ratification. Each separate motion to Dismiss would require a separate ratification, rather than attempting to
legitimize multiple past ultra-vires actions.
In addition to other points which may be raised, this vote, the procedure, and the tactical intent to bypass committee discussion to ratify misconduct, violates our statement of principles and constitutes misrepresentation and obfuscation. Additionally, some
of the ratification items would be moot (such as the prior motion to Dismiss, along with a previous IC which was found by a court to lack independence due to mere caucus association, without the actual personal interests attending the current SIC-related strategy;
these are distinct). Each item should be considered separately. The instant question is not a continuation of the same 2024 motion, but an entirely different motion, and an entirely different legal strategy. Conflating the two is both misleading and out of
order.
Furthermore, Mr. Chadderdon is correct that the ratification of misconduct on this board presents a direct refutation to the assumption of good faith, especially in the present circumstances. The use of an email ballot to bypass debate further aggravates this
dynamic. The new information showing intentional failures to disclose severe conflicts of interest by Redpath and other members, along with conflicts of interest with General Counsel has also not been addressed and raises serious concerns about validating
the strategy. Stifling debate and rushing to judgement is out of order.
Mahalo!
Austin Martin
R1
Join the fight and support the removal of Socialists from the LP by donating at the link below:
To: Jessi Cowart <jessi....@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC
<entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
To: Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
To: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
As I have known Beth for over a decade and consider her a friend, I feel it would not be proper for me to vote on this item.
I will defer to Jessi on this vote.
Keith Thompson
Region 3 South Rep
To: Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
I vote Aye.
Sincerely,
Steven Nekhaila
Chairman, LNC
Sincerely,
Steven Nekhaila
Chairman, LNC
To: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Yes
Travis L. Bost
LNC At-Large
Travi...@LP.org
From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 11:32:38 AM
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 11:32:38 AM
To: lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
lnc-public_forward
Sep 30, 2025, 11:49:12 PMSep 30
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2025 3:49:02 AM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
I am appealing all three of your recent rulings. The cited sections of the policy manual were adopted specifically in the policy manual under "LNC Behavior Standards", with the preface that "LNC members
shall not violate their fiduciary duties to the LNC."
Duty of Care:
You claim, "Any individual member’s disagreement with the amount or timing of legal advice does not constitute a breach of duty of care or a parliamentary defect in continuing the ballot." This mischaracterizes my objection. Advice has not been given.
The question has been evaded, and justifications were inconsistent with previous advice. On September 19, I explicitly raised a legal question regarding compliance with SIC independence provisions under 29-411.05, given Bill’s admission of receiving payments
similar to those identified as conflicting in the SIC report concerning Swing Vote Strategists. It has not been answered. We are considering the motion which ratifies an unauthorized legal strategy, based around those findings from the SIC report. The LNC
must be advised on this matter before deciding whether to ratify this strategy.
Furthermore, I requested a consultation with Ackerman regarding questions Oliver stated he could not answer about the dismissal filing. These requests have been ignored.
Your characterization of this issue is wrong and forms further basis for my objection to your ruling on the good faith violation.
Duty of Loyalty:
According to the SIC report, a member of the investigation committee is independent if they lack a material interest in the matters investigated. On September 10, Bill admitted, in the presence of you, most of the LNC, and counsel, to having such an interest.
This admission raises serious concerns about the integrity of the SIC and undermines several foundational arguments in its report. This is in addition to previous evidence that has been submitted and ignored of another member of the SIC pressuring the former
Chair to enter into the SVS agreements, and assuring her that there were no rule violations. Were the treasurer's past engagements used as an example to assure her further?
Duty of Good Faith:
The refusal to address my questions, which are directly tied to legal arguments filed without proper authorization, further supports my claim of a breach of good faith. These actions reflect your ongoing failure to uphold the obligations of your role.
You were just caught in an attempt to coerce my removal by withholding legal support from a State Party in my region.
The Chair of our New Mexico affiliate asked you:
"Will the LNC help defend the LP brand in New Mexico if we change our regional 1 representation? I really have no choice, I guess?"
You responded
"I may still be able to persuade Hall to do probono work if Martin and Chadderdon explicitly aren’t involved."
I also join in Mr Martin's point of order to the chair so that his concerns shall be addressed by the chair.
Andrew Chadderdon
Region 1 Rep | Libertarian National Committee
From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2025 3:42:00 PM
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2025 3:42:00 PM
lnc-public_forward
Oct 1, 2025, 11:26:34 AMOct 1
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2025 3:26:20 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Mr. Chadderdon,
Your appeal of my rulings has been noted.
For the record, I reaffirm that the points of order you raised are not well taken, and I address your objections as follows:
-
Duty of Care
You are incorrect that counsel has not given advice, including on the specific issue you raise regarding Mr. Redpath. Counsel has advised you, repeatedly, that he believes Mr. Redpath complies with the statutory definition of “independent” for purposes of serving
on the SIC. You are also incorrect that Mr. Redpath’s conduct was “similar to” Ms. McArdle’s conduct in forming Swing Vote Strategists and receiving undisclosed payment from that entity. Mr. Redpath admitted that he neglected to disclose his petitioning for
RFK, Jr. Mr. Redpath petitioned for RFK Jr. while also petitioning for LP candidates, a common and lawful practice among petitioners, and not a material conflict of interest.
Your claim that you have been denied legal advice is contradicted by the extensive record of email exchanges in which Mr. Hall responded to your questions, as well as the 2.5-hour conference call arranged specifically to provide you access to counsel, a call
that ended only at your suggestion. The LNC retains counsel on a limited basis; no member is entitled to unlimited consultation. I also do not recall you ever requesting a consultation with Ackerman, and I certainly have not refused any such request.
-
Duty of Loyalty
Mr. Redpath did not admit to having a material interest in the outcome of the SIC’s matters. This issue has been addressed multiple times, including directly in response to your prior comments. Your statement that you submitted “evidence” of an SIC member pressuring
the former Chair to transact with SVS is false.
-
Duty of Good Faith
No one has refused to answer your questions, and no one has withheld legal support from a state party. Mr. Hall withdrew his offer to represent New Mexico pro bono because you made repeated false accusations against him and he concluded you were acting in bad
faith.
Once again, fiduciary duties are ethical standards, not parliamentary rules of order. Points of order can only be sustained when a rule of order, bylaw, or procedural requirement has been violated. Allegations of conflicts or misconduct may be debated or pursued
through separate motions, but they do not render the pending motion out of order.
Accordingly, the ruling of the chair stands. The appeal is properly before the body in the form:
“Shall the decision of the chair be sustained?”
The assembly will now decide.
Sincerely,
Steven Nekhaila
Sincerely,
Steven Nekhaila
Chairman, LNC
From: Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2025 11:49 PM
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2025 11:49 PM
lnc-public_forward
Oct 1, 2025, 11:38:15 AMOct 1
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2025 3:37:57 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
In regard to the points of order raised by Mr. Martin and moved by Mr. Chadderdon,
The point of order is not well taken.
-
Single Motion vs. Multiple Separate Items
The pending motion concerns one subject, the ratification of legal actions taken in defense of the organization. Under Robert’s Rules of Order, a motion is in order so long as it pertains to a single general subject. Distinctions between filings, strategies,
or stages of litigation do not require separate motions when they are all part of the same overall legal matter.
-
Statement of Principles & Allegations of Misconduct
Points of order address whether a pending motion violates parliamentary rules or governing documents. Allegations of misconduct, motives, or “misrepresentation” are matters of debate or separate disciplinary process. They do not render the current motion procedurally
out of order.
-
Claims of Mootness
The chair does not rule on mootness; the assembly itself determines whether ratification is prudent or necessary. Members are free to vote accordingly, but it is not a basis for declaring the motion out of order.
-
Conflicts of Interest and Good Faith
Assertions regarding conflicts or lack of good faith are not parliamentary defects. They may be raised in debate, but they do not invalidate the motion or the ballot.
-
Use of Email Ballot
The LNC has long used email ballots in compliance with bylaws and policy manual. The current ballot was properly noticed and is valid.
Accordingly, the motion is in order and the ballot shall proceed.
Sincerely,
Steven Nekhaila
Sincerely,
Steven Nekhaila
Chairman, LNC
From: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2025 11:26 AM
Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2025 11:26 AM
lnc-public_forward
Oct 1, 2025, 11:57:03 AMOct 1
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2025 3:56:46 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
I would add that Mr. Redpath's work for ballot access is not remotely close to the Freedom Calls situation and it strikes me as a desperate ploy to draw some moral equivalence where none exists that some may save face.
Mr. Redpath worked to help other third parties with ballot access in states where we had no competing candidate.
Freedom Calls, on the other hand, seems to be a situation where one unilaterally hired their domestic partner without disclosing it, was caught, had a PM amendment passed to prevent such future abuse, and then secretly re-hired the same person via a
sole proprietor LLC without disclosing that to the board - seemingly funneling tens of thousands into their own household without disclosing it, in direct violation of a policy passed because of the actions of those very same people.
The two allegations do not appear similar to me:
-
One is failing to disclose something that wasn't even a conflict.
-
The other is purposefully not disclosing a direct conflict that had directly been addressed in the immediate past.
Had Mr. Redpath voted in favor of the JFC and championed it so that he could get money from it, sure - that would be a more similar situation. However, that was not the case.
Mr. Redpath abstained from the initial ExComm vote and even voted to rescind the ExComm's decision to enter into the fundraiser.
Further, I would add that the ExComm should have never had the authority to enter into the agreement without a full vote of the LNC in the first place.
Keith Thompson
Region 3 South Rep
From: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2025 10:37 AM
Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2025 10:37 AM
lnc-public_forward
Oct 1, 2025, 12:27:55 PMOct 1
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2025 4:27:37 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Yall sound nervous.
Austin Martin
R1
Join the fight and support the removal of Socialism from the LP by donating at the link below:
From: Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2025 5:56:46 AM
Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2025 5:56:46 AM
lnc-public_forward
Oct 2, 2025, 4:21:33 PMOct 2
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2025 8:21:17 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Are we going to get a dedicated ballot thread to vote on the appeal of the ruling of the chair? Or are we to vote here...
Andrew Chadderdon
Region 1 Rep | Libertarian National Committee
From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2025 12:27:37 PM
Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2025 12:27:37 PM
lnc-public_forward
Oct 2, 2025, 4:35:27 PMOct 2
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2025 8:35:16 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Appealing the ruling of the Chair requires a second.
Sincerely,
Steven Nekhaila
Chairman, LNC
lnc-public_forward
Oct 2, 2025, 4:36:08 PMOct 2
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2025 8:35:49 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Second for Region 1.
Austin Martin
R1
Join the fight and support the removal of Socialism from the LP by donating at the link below:
From: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2025 10:35:16 AM
Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2025 10:35:16 AM
lnc-public_forward
Oct 2, 2025, 4:37:10 PMOct 2
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2025 8:36:41 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>; Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Alternates cannot second. It would need to come from a “seated” board member.
Sincerely,
Steven Nekhaila
Chairman, LNC
lnc-public_forward
Oct 2, 2025, 4:38:54 PMOct 2
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2025 8:38:39 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
I just did.
Mr. Lam has temporarily left the room, and I will be sitting until he returns.
He can speak up if I have preempted him, and I will happily yield.
Austin Martin
R1
Join the fight and support the removal of Socialism from the LP by donating at the link below:
From: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2025 10:36:41 AM
Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2025 10:36:41 AM
lnc-public_forward
Oct 2, 2025, 5:25:01 PMOct 2
to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com
From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2025 9:24:48 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Results for Email Ballot 20250923-02 Dismiss Vest Lawsuit:
Motion:
LNC to ratify prior decision to direct counsel to seek dismissal of the lawsuit Vest v. LNC, and further direct Chairman Nekhaila to continue that course of action, as per the recommendation by vote of the Executive Committee.
Votes: 11-1-3 with 3 not voting
Aye: Bohler, Bost, Darr, Hays, Knebel, McGee, Nanna, Redpath, Cowart (alt), Vinson, Nekhaila
No: Weir (alt)
Abstain: Dassing, McMahon, Watkins
Did Not Vote: Chadderdon/Wiley, Lam/Martin
To: lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>
Subject: EMAIL BALLOT 20250923-02 DISMISS VEST LAWSUIT
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages