In the Matter of a Mail Dispute		) April 15, 1997
Between					)
					)
JOHN COMBS				)
					)
    and					)
					)
BARBARA J. DENAHAN and			)
STEPHEN J. DENAHAN			) P.S. Docket No. MD 96-397

APPEARANCE FOR JOHN COMBS:		John Combs
					908 SW 51 Way
					Gainesville, FL  32607-3854

APPEARANCE FOR BARBARA J. DENAHAN:	Patrice Boyes, Esq.
 and STEPHEN J. DENAHAN			Boyes & Associates, P.A.
					602 S. Main Street
					Gainesville, FL  32601-6718

This mail dispute has been docketed pursuant to Postal Operations Manual (POM 7, August 1, 1996) 616.21, which requires the Chief Field Counsel to forward certain unresolved mail disputes to the Judicial Officer for resolution. The mail in dispute, which is addressed to ONLINE COMPUTING and/or ONLINE COMPUTING, INC., 3550-L SW 34 Street, Gainesville, Florida 32608-6521, is now being held by the Postmaster at Gainesville, Florida. Both Disputants submitted sworn statements and accompanying documents in support of their positions, as required by 39 C.F.R. 965.5. Disputant Denahan has also submitted a Motion to Dismiss. In addition, the parties submitted a Joint Stipulation and Motion for Voluntary Dismissal. The following Findings of Fact are based on the sworn statements and accompanying documents, as well as on the Joint Stipulation.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. This dispute was originally docketed on November 19, 1996. On January 8, 1997, the parties submitted a Joint Stipulation and Motion for Voluntary Dismissal. In this Stipulation, the parties agreed to distribute mail amicably between them in accordance with the arrangement specified in the Stipulation. (Joint Stipulation).

2. Paragraph 3 of the Joint Stipulation provided that:

". . . all business mail addressed to Online Computing, regardless of other names appearing on the envelope, will be presumed without prejudice to be the property of the DENAHANS. Should any personal mail of COMBS or Online Computing, Inc. and/or any current or former officers be erroneously addressed to Online Computing, the DENAHANS without prejudice agree to return that mail to the U.S. Postal Service for forwarding per COMBS' instructions to the U.S. Postal Service." (Joint Stipulation).

3. Paragraph 5 of the Joint Stipulation provided that enforcement of the agreement "will be in a court of competent jurisdiction in Alachua County, Florida, and that the agreement will be interpreted under applicable Florida law." (Joint Stipulation).

4. Based on this motion and a telephone conference between the undersigned and the parties, the dispute was dismissed with prejudice on January 14, 1997.

5. The Delivery Order which accompanied the Dismissal directed the Postmaster at the Gainesville, Florida Post Office to deliver to DENAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. d/b/a Online Computing, all mail being held or hereafter received addressed to Online Computing or Online Computing, Inc., 3550-L SW 34 St., Gainesville, FL 32608-6521.⁽¹⁾

6. On February 24, 1997, Disputant Combs refiled his Complaint regarding this mail dispute. In his Complaint, Disputant Combs objected to the handling and forwarding by the Denahans of his personal mail, as well as mail that was intended for "Online Computing, Inc.," once that mail was delivered to the Denahans in accordance with the Delivery Order (Statement of Combs).

DECISION

It is evident from the allegations in the refiled Complaint, as well as from Mr. Combs' sworn statement, that his objections concern the handling and forwarding of his personal mail after the mail was delivered in accordance with the Delivery Order which was issued on January 14, 1997. Mr. Combs alleges numerous instances of the Denahans opening his personal mail prior to forwarding it to him. He also complains of delays in forwarding of his mail, and what he believes are instances where the Denahans had his mail "returned to sender" rather than forwarded to him. Mr. Combs does not, however, dispute that the January 14, 1997 Delivery Order accurately reflects the intention of the parties to the Joint Stipulation.

Our Delivery Order, based on the agreement of the parties, addressed only the proper delivery of the mail. We do not determine ownership of the mail or whether the mail is handled properly while it is in the possession of other than its true owner.

Accordingly, since the mail was being delivered in accordance with the January 14, 1997 Delivery Order, and since Mr. Combs does not object to the delivery of the mail in dispute, but rather objects to the handling of his personal mail after it is delivered, the Motion to Dismiss, submitted by the Denahans, is granted. If Mr. Combs continues to object to the manner in which the Denahans handle his mail, he should pursue that dispute in a court of competent jurisdiction in Alachua County, Florida.

The attached delivery order should be reissued.

						William K. Mahn

						Administrative Judge

1    The wording of this Delivery Order was discussed and agreed to by both parties during
the telephone conference.