Appeal of CAROL B. WRIGHT and CULBREATH WHITEHEAD, II

Administrative Law Judges

In the Matter of a Mail Dispute			) June 26, 1995
Between						)
						)
CAROL B. WRIGHT					)
						)
  and						)
						)
CULBREATH WHITEHEAD, II				) P.S. Docket No. MD 95-138

APPEARANCE FOR CAROL B. WRIGHT:			Carol B. Wright
						1580 Oakview Drive
						Sarasota, FL 34242-3341

APPEARANCE FOR
CULBREATH WHITEHEAD, II:			Culbreath Whitehead, II
						P.O. Box 224
						Tallevast, FL 34270-0224

INITIAL DECISION

The United States Postal Service Law Department has referred this mail dispute to this office for resolution. The mail in dispute is that addressed to A. L. Hartman Properties, P.O. Box 7737, Sarasota, FL 34277-7737. Both parties have submitted statements required by 39 C.F.R. §965.5, and Disputant Wright has filed comments permitted by 39 C.F.R. §965.6. The following findings of fact and decision are based on the submittals of the parties and the documents forwarded by the Law Department.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. On October 1, 1994, the parties to this mail dispute, along with Scott H. Stebbins, Jacqueline J. Stebbins, and the RIGHT Company, entered into a "Declaration and Agreement" ("Agreement") that created and provided for the management of the A. L. Hartman Properties, described as a "Freemarket Contractual Company." Signatories to the agreement included the Disputants, each of whom was listed as a "Shareowner/Trustee," Scott and Jacqueline Stebbins, listed as Trustees, and Disputant Whitehead as Trustee for the RIGHT Company, which company was listed as a Shareowner.

2. Under the Agreement, the trustees held the exclusive rights to manage the affairs of the company. The trustees were also given the power to appoint, from among themselves, a chief executive officer for the company. Further, the trustees had the authority to delegate to one or more of their number any power which the trustees might themselves exercise. Finally, paragraph 16 of the Agreement provided that "no informality or defect in the manner of calling or holding meetings shall affect the validity of any action taken by a majority of all trustees."

3. On or about October 6, 1994, a post office box was rented on behalf of A. L. Hartman Properties by Disputant Whitehead or by both Disputants.⁽¹⁾

4. The record contains a document signed by a majority of the trustees indicating that at a meeting on October 13, 1994, Disputant Wright was selected by the trustees as chief executive officer of the company.⁽²⁾

5. As a result of conflicting orders given the personnel at the Pinecroft Branch, a dispute has now arisen between Mr. Whitehead and Ms. Wright as to the right to receive mail addressed to the company.⁽³⁾

DECISION

Under §D042.4.1 of the Domestic Mail Manual (DMM), where disagreement arises as to the delivery of mail addressed to an organization, the mail is to be delivered as directed by the organization's president or equivalent official. As reflected in Finding 4, above, Disputant Wright was selected as chief executive officer of A. L. Hartman Properties by a majority of the trustees. I also conclude that the chief executive officer holds a position that is the equivalent of the president of an organization, as that term is used in the DMM. Accordingly, I conclude that Disputant Carol Wright is entitled to receive the mail addressed to A. L. Hartman Properties.

This decision resolves only the question of the right to delivery of the mail. It does not purport to decide the question of ownership of the mail. Accordingly, if Ms. Wright receives mail intended for Mr. Whitehead, she is to have it forwarded to him promptly.

The attached delivery order should be issued.

						David I. Brochstein
						Administrative Judge

1. In their statements, the Disputants disagree as to how the post office box in dispute came to be rented. Ms. Wright states that she filled out the rental application but, before she submitted the application to the Pinecroft Branch of the Sarasota Post Office on October 6, she allowed Disputant Whitehead to add his name to the application as an additional party authorized to receive the mail. Mr. Whitehead claims that he filled out a rental application listing only himself as authorized to receive the mail addressed to A. L. Hartman Properties. A statement by the Assistant Postmaster at the Pinecroft Branch states that the application actually submitted contained both names. This disagreement need not be resolved since, whatever the process that led to rental of the post office box, there is no dispute that the post office box was opened on behalf of A. L. Hartman Properties.

2. Disputant Whitehead contends that the document purporting to be minutes of the meeting at which the election took place was actually produced after the fact and was "predated." However, Mr. Whitehead disputes neither the authenticity of the signatures of the trustees on the document nor the fact that the signatories to the document (Carol Wright, Scott Stebbins and Jacqueline Stebbins) represented a majority of the trustees. Therefore, under paragraph 16 of the Agreement, the action of the trustees in selecting Ms. Wright as the chief executive officer was effective.

3. There is also a disagreement between the parties as to whether Mr. Whitehead was effectively removed as a trustee and shareowner of the company. That disagreement also need not be resolved in order to resolve this mail dispute.