Submit your story for the new book! Friends of Michael T. Dyke:
MichaelTDyke@gmail.com
.
Excerpt #4. From the book by: Melinda Green;
• Kings Head British Pub ~ St. Augustine
• The History. Fraud or Deception?
• Chapter 2; The Roving Guitar Player / Vocalist
"Steve with his windblown hair reminds me of that horrendous mug-of-a-man Boris Something.
Will they not be married soon? Elaine and Steve share the same addresses on business ventures.
Steve is a privileged royal at the pub! Most mornings near lunch-time he wanders into the kitchen just as the worker-kooks cook. His stubby little fingers grab some of this and some of that ... Samples you see? For Me, me, me. Not You!
With a smile he eats whilst standing, hovering over all of the delicacies prepared for the day ..."
Is this the same Steve (Elaine's Live-in Boyfriend?) known to many at the pub?"
UNKEMPT STEVE
The above link will show you who the real Steve is ... or is not!
Excerpt #3. From the book by: Melinda Green;
• Kings Head British Pub ~ St. Augustine
• His Story. Fraud or Deception?
• Chapter 7; My Stepdaughter
"From the day I met Ann I knew trouble was imminent with my stepdaughter Elaine.
Such jealousy and disdain I had never felt.
When Elaine was 16 - 17 years old (probably 10th or 11th grade), she discovered Ann and me kissing on the couch during an episode of the TV show:
My Favorite Martian which happened to be Elaine's favorite TV show at the time.
She started screaming at me: "You're not my Father," ... "You are so ugly like Uncle Martin!"
From that day forward, she addressed me as "Uncle Martin."
When I went into the hospital the second time - she said: "I hope you never come back!"
This was heartbreaking as one evening she heard my prayer and said: "No one can hear you! There is no such thing as God!"
Uncle Martin
The above link will show you who "Uncle Martin" is...Kinda Cute...
Excerpt #2. From the book by: Melinda Green;
• Kings Head British Pub ~ St. Augustine
• The History. Fraud or Deception?
• Chapter 9; The Real Cooks in the Kitchen
"Authentic British Pub Grub Food..."
To be Authentic British Food, should the head cook be a soul-sister from The West Side? (West Augustine)?
As a former employee told Melinda; "Never once had I ever seen Elaine lift a finger doing any work, only playing the part of a lovely peep in the chef attire/outfit."
... "She's an actress who's inherited the role from her divorced/disowned stepfather and mother, laughing all the way to the mattress." ... "She comes off as a 'self-made' woman."
"A big difference between 'self-made' and a 'spoiled brat.' "
"The head-cook (soul-sister) does get a few perks, as she is allowed to eat samples all through the day."
"Recently tipping the scales at 265, not bad for 5' foot 10."
"Hide the cook! E. often is heard saying."
"If the Kings Head British Pub really prides itself on 'British Cooks,' why then, do you never see them?"
The Real ~ Head Chef
Notice the real head-cook (pictured) by following the link above.
Also notice in the photograph, they gave her the peasant-girl garb. As a non-anglo, she may be the head cook, but not allowed to wear the flag/colors only privileged to the qualifying ladies/staff.
Recently, in a phone conversation, the manager "Heidi" defended the real head-chef/cook by saying: "Both her parents are white!"
Oh honestly Heidi, it doesn't matter if her dad is black or white. Just finally admit she's not British - as y'all claim.
Rumor has it that the attractive head-cook "peasant" has gained 100 pounds (not currency) since the linked photo was taken.
*Note: The Kings Head British Pub insider also said: "The only other main cook will most likely never be pictured (with or without the ladies / staff) is because she is about 5 feet tall, very short-hair and boyish looking - always promoting LGBTQ-XYZ."
Excerpt #1. From the book by: Melinda Green;
• Kings Head British Pub ~ St. Augustine
• The History. Fraud or Deception?
• Chapter 6; Praise for the Royal Family
News4Jax : Ann Dyke / Elaine Frew article
"A recent interview related to the passing of Queen Elizabeth II
by the British-by-birth owners of the Kings Head British Pub in St. Augustine. "Elaine Frew & Ann Dyke were happy to fawn over the Queen for News4Jax..." said a Kings Head British Pub insider.
Also heard saying: "the next President of The United States should be Michelle Obama with Gavin Newsome as The V.P."
The co-writers of Melinda's Book hope she was joking.
Original PDF Document
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
Case No.: SC03-524
On Petition For Review Of A Decision
Of
the Fifth District Court of Appeal
Case No. 5D01-2183
MICHAEL TERRANCE DYKE,
Petitioner,
v.
ANN DOREEN DYKE,
Respondent,
THE KING’S HEAD BRITISH PUB, INCORPORATED,
Respondent.
PETITIONER’S SECOND
AMENDED BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
Michael B. Swindle
174 West Comstock Avenue
Suite 100
Winter Park, Florida 32789
(407) 246-1114
Florida Bar Number 171116
Attorney for Michael Terrance Dyke
INDEX
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Statutes Page ii
Rules Page ii
PREFACE Page ii
STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS Page 1
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT Page 4
ARGUMENT Page 5
THE DISTRICT COURT’S DECISION AFFIRMING THE TRIAL COURT’S RULING CONFLICTS WITH SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES DECISION AND SUPREME
COURT OF FLORIDA DECISION AND RULE; APPELLATE DISTRICT COURTS’ DECISIONS AS REGARDS MENTAL INCAPACITY, MANDATORY FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE,
FRAUD; CONCEALMENT OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT; AND DUE PROCESS.
CONCLUSION Page 9
i
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
CASES
Andrade v. Andrade, 720 So.2d 551 (Fla. App. 4 Dist. 1993) Page 4, 6, 9
Cohen v. Cohen, 346 So.2d 1047 (Fla. App. 2 Dist. 1977) Page 4, 6, 9
Goldberg v. Goldberg, 643 So.2d 656 (Fla. App. 4Dist. 1994) Page 4, 6, 9
Holy Trinity Church v. United States, 1892 (143 U.S. 457, 5, 8, 10
12 S.Ct. 511, 36 L.Ed.225)
Varrieur v. Varrieur, 775 So. 2d 361 (Fla. App. 3 Dist. 2000) Page 5, 7, 10
Waterson v. Seat and Crawford (Supreme Court of Florida Terms Page 5, 8, 9
held in 1863-4), Page 326
Wilkes v. Wilkes, 768 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. App. 2 Dist. 2000) Page 5, 9
RULES
Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure 12.010(b) 1
Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure 12.285 5
Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure 12.285(d) 1, 2, 9
Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure 12.285(d)(14) 2
Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure 12.540 3
Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.540 3
ii
PREFACE
The Petitioner is Michael Terrance Dyke and the Respondent is Ann Doreen
Dyke. The King’s Head Pub, Incorporated, is the Third Party Respondent. Judith
Shine represented Ann Dyke and The King’s Head British Pub, Incorporated,
simultaneously during the domestic case at trial level. Linda Logan Bryan appeared
for Ann Dyke on Appeal whilst Judith Shine, her law partner, entered an appearance
on behalf of The King’s Head British Pub, Incorporated on appeal.
iii
STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS
Michael Terrance Dyke and Ann Doreen Dyke were married on May 24, 1974
in Dorset, England. Both are British subjects and lawful permanent residents of the
United States. Up until the Final Judgment of Dissolution rendered April 7, 1997 they
jointly owned The King’s Head British Pub, Incorporated.
Ann Dyke filed a sworn Petition for Dissolution of Marriage in the Circuit Court
of St. Johns County. This verified Petition for Dissolution of Marriage by Ann Dyke
alleged her husband, Michael Dyke, suffered from depression and was presently
committed to, and in, the St. Augustine Psychiatric Center. Ann Dyke raised the
husband Dyke’s mental incapacity in her Petition for Dissolution of Marriage as her
reason for a prayer for temporary injunction and total control of the couple’s family
corporation, to wit, The King’s Head British Pub, Incorporated. Ann Dyke requested
Michael Dyke be served with this restraining order whilst he was still a patient in the
St. Augustine Psychiatric Center. The court granted a Temporary Injunction without
notice to the hospitalized husband taking away from him all control of the couple’s
business of which he owned a 51% share. At the time of the filing and subsequent
service, Michael Dyke was mentally incompetent, hospitalized in a locked facility at the
St. Augustine Psychiatric Center.
After being awarded exclusive temporary control of the Corporation, neither the
wife nor legal counsel entered an appearance on behalf of the Corporation or filed the
mandatory financial disclosure pursuant to Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure
12.285(d). According to Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure 12.010(b)
promulgated by the Supreme Court of Florida, “These rules shall be construed to
secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of the procedures covered by
them and shall be construed to secure simplicity in procedure and fairness in
administration.” Michael Dyke filed the only financial affidavit valuing the marital 1
estate at $1,013,250.00
1
Ann Dyke purposely avoided filing the required financial affidavit in an effort to
thwart the equitable distribution of the marital estate. By not filing the required
financial affidavit and supporting financial documents outlined in Florida Family L.R.P.
12.285(d), Ann Dyke presented non-existent assets to the court at the final hearing on
April 7, 1997 which was not attended by the husband Michael Dyke.
Mr. Dyke was mentally ill and hospitalized intermittently throughout the divorce
proceedings and a mental health patient in St. Ann’s Royal Psychiatric Hospital
in England on both the date of the final hearing and rendition of the Final Judgment
dated April 7, 1997. Michael Dyke discharged his first counsel, a board certified
marital lawyer, replacing him with counsel selected and paid by his wife Ann Dyke.
Mr. Dyke’s subsequent counsel withdrew without notice to Mr. Dyke in January 1997,
leaving Mr. Dyke with no representation at the final hearing. On March 4, 1997, one
month prior to the final hearing, Michael Dyke, from St. Ann’s Royal Psychiatric
Hospital, requested a continuance, which request was ignored by Judge Weinberg.
At the final hearing Ann Dyke was represented by Judith Shine; neither The King’s
Head British Pub, Inc., nor Michael Dyke was represented by counsel.
Although the couple entered into a separation agreement for a fifty/fifty (50/50)
division of all marital property, Ann Dyke did not serve as required by Florida Family
Law Rules of Procedure 12.285(d)(14), “all written premarital or marital agreements,
whether before or during the marriage” to the Court or bring the agreement to the
Judge’s attention at the final hearing. At the final hearing Ann Dyke, with Judith Shine
as her counsel, appeared and testified without a court reporter present. Ann Dyke was
awarded all marital assets listed in Michael Dyke’s Financial Affidavit while Michael
Dyke received non-existent assets introduced by the wife at the final hearing.
2
Twice Mrs. Dyke sent Mr. Dyke out of the country to ensure his absence in the
divorce proceedings; the first time Mr. Dyke was banished by the judge which the
court had no power to do.*
Mr. Dyke sought to enforce the 50/50 marital agreement and for other relief
pursuant to Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.540, Florida Family Law Rules of
Procedure 12.540, and other authority which was ultimately denied by Judge J. Michael
Traynor on July 2, 2001, reversing himself and vacating his June 13, 2001, June 15,
2001 Orders in his July 2, 2001 Order as follows:
“Therefore, this Court finds that the Final Judgment of Dissolution of
Marriage is not void but, at most, is voidable. See, e.g., Curry v. Currey,
335 N.E.2d 742 (Ill. App. Ct. 1975) (‘A judgment against an incompetent
at the time of its rendition and not represented by a guardian is not
absolutely void, but is at most merely voidable...’)...”
The Court is sensitive to the issues raised in this case and the duty of the
Court sitting inequity, to protect the mentally incapacitated. However,
the Court cannot arbitrarily ignore the time constraints imposed by the
Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b). Even though Mr. Dyke’s
Motion to Set Aside is dismissed in its entirety, the Court’s two prior
orders, Order Denying Motion to Strike and Granting Evidentiary
Hearing; and Amended Order Granting Motion to Strike as to Former
Husband’s Allegations of Fraud and Granting Evidentiary Hearing, the
Court believes this type of result was contemplated by the Florida
Supreme Court. The avenue left open to parties requesting relief from a
final judgment so many years after the judgment was entered is to file an
independent action, if possible, pursuant to 1.540(b). Mr. Dyke has
availed himself of this opportunity by filing an independent action entitled
Amended complaint for Fraud, Legal malpractice, Accounting and
Tortuous Interference with Contractual Relationships, Case CA-01-152.”
______________________________________________________
* Author’s Note:
Michael Dyke was escorted, alone under court order after the
divorce was filed, to England by an armed private investigator hired by his wife and
as arranged by attorney Judith Shine. The investigator took Mr. Dyke to his native
village and left or deposited him in the rain on the steps of his family physician’s
surgery (office). The doctor admitted Mr. Dyke on an emergency basis to a
psychiatric hospital. (British non-residents such as Mr. Dyke are not entitled to
National Health Service except in an emergency.)
3
Judge Traynor by his Order dated June 15, 2001 made the following findings of fact:
“That from the time of the filing for the Petition for Dissolution of
Marriage up to June 27, 1997 Michael Dyke was hospitalized at various
times for mental illness, including the day of the Final Hearing; that Ann
Dyke requested the court order Michael Dyke to England for treatment
arranged by Mrs. Dyke;* that Ann Dyke requested Michael Dyke travel
to the Cayman Islands to find a site for a new pub, promising
reconciliation and retirement to the islands; that Michael Dyke, while in
the Cayman Islands was hospitalized for mental illness and was
subsequently sent to England for further hospitalization due to mental
illness; and that the marital estate awarded to Ann Dyke totaled between
$750,000 and $1 million.”
The Appellate Court agreed with Judge Traynor, the absence of a financial
affidavit from either the wife or corporation does not equal fraud, but did not address
the issue of mental incompetency.
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
This instant decision is in direct conflict with Andrade v. Andrade, 720 So. 2d
551 (Fla. App. 4 Dist. 1973); Cohen v. Cohen, 346 So. 2d 1047, 1048 (Fla. 2d DCA
1977); Goldberg v. Goldberg, 643 So. 2d 656 (Fla. App. 4 Dist 1994), requiring that
dissolution be delayed for three years post adjudication of incompetency after
appointment of a guardian. Michael Dyke requested help and a first-time continuance
from Judge Weinberg whilst a mental patient in St. Ann’s Royal Psychiatric Hospital
in England, which was ignored. Michael Dyke continues to be homeless, mentally ill,
and without the funds to afford adequate medical treatment.
______________________________________________________
* Author’s Note:
The exact quote from St. Johns County: “The Court: Well, I
remember, I remember when he went over there. As a matter of fact, his
former wife made those arrangements and he was taken over there and he
didn’t stay for very long, he stayed for some period.”
4
This instant decision is in direct conflict with Varrieur v. Varrieur, 775 So. 2d
361 ( Fla. App. 3 Dist. 2000); and Wilkes v. Wilkes, 768 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. App. 2
Dist 2000). ( Michael Dyke was prejudiced; there was no waiver of financial affidavit,
no competent record to support award in a complicated divorce with significant
marital estate.) The mandatory Florida Family L.R.P. 12.285 was ignored.
The Supreme Court of Florida in the instant appeal is the court of last resort and
conflicts with its earlier decision in Waterson v. Seat and Crawford (Supreme Court
of Florida Terms held in 1863-4), wherein a litigant may not be deprived of a real or
meaningful remedy for a wrong and the Supreme Court of the United States decision
in Holy Trinity Church v. United States, 1892 (143 U.S. 457, 12 S.Ct. 511, 36 L.Ed.
225), wherein it was held a rule or statute must not be followed to the letter of the law
if it leads to an absurd result. Michael Dyke, a mentally ill person, cannot pursue relief
in a civil action; his only hope lies in equity.
ARGUMENT
THE DISTRICT COURT’S DECISION AFFIRMING THE TRIAL COURT’S RULING
CONFLICTS WITH SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES DECISION AND
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA DECISION AND RULE; APPELLATE DISTRICT
COURTS? DECISIONS AS REGARDS MENTAL INCAPACITY, MANDATORY
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE, FRAUD; CONCEALMENT OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT;
AND DUE PROCESS.
Appellate Court Opinion Excerpt:
Although hospitalized in a psychiatric facility
at the time he was served with the dissolution papers, the former husband retained
counsel and filed an answer and counterclaim for dissolution, alimony, equitable
distribution, and a partition of the parties’ real and personal property. At the time
of the final hearing in March [sic*] 1997, the former husband was again hospitalized
in a psychiatric facility in England.
As a result, he did not attend the final hearing
and was not represented because his counsel had previously withdrawn. A final
judgment of dissolution was entered in April 1997, awarding the former wife what
the former husband now contends was substantially all of the parties’ property.
5
Michael Dyke’s Argument: The instant decision is in direct conflict with Andrade
v. Andrade, supra; Cohen v. Cohen, supra; Goldberg v. Goldberg, supra, requiring
that dissolution be delayed for three years after adjudication of incompetency.
After Michael Dyke was sent by his wife to the Cayman Islands and repatriated
by the British Crown Colony to a mental hospital in England, he did not have the
mental capacity to protect his interests. He was a patient without any money in St.
Ann’s Psychiatric Hospital in the United Kingdom even though he was the primary
shareholder of a business and marital estate valued at $1 million dollars. He was
penniless because the family trial judge took his business away from him and awarded
exclusive control to the wife, ostensibly, to protect the business from mismanagement
due to Michael Dyke’s mental incompetence and incapacity. The Wife and the Court
cannot on one hand say Mr. Dyke was mentally incompetent to manage his business
but mentally competent to manage his divorce proceedings from a psychiatric bed in
England without funds for a lawyer. There existed in Florida adequate psychiatric
hospitals where he had access to Florida lawyers. The Florida judges do not have the
power to banish Mr. Dyke out of the country, nor exclude him from family court.
Appellate Court Opinion Excerpt: More than three years after the final judgment
was entered, the former husband filed a motion to set the judgment aside, alleging
fraud. He further alleged that the former wife’s failure to file the financial affidavit
required by Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.285(d)(1), rendered the final
judgment void. The trial court dismissed as untimely the former husband’s
allegations of fraud and concluded that the failure of a party to file a financial
affidavit in a dissolution proceeding did not deprive the court of jurisdiction to
consider the dissolution petition, thereby rendering the judgment void. We agree.
______________________________________________________
*The Final Judgment was April 7, 1997, whilst the husband was hospitalized in St.
Ann’s Royal Psychiatric Hospital.
6
Michael Dyke’s Argument:
This is in direct conflict with Varrieur v. Varrieur,
supra. Michael Dyke was prejudiced by a Final Judgment without a financial affidavit
purposely being filed by his wife individually and as Trustee for The Kings Head
British Pub, Incorporated, resulting in him receiving naught from a marital estate
undisputed at $1,013,250.00
This divorce was not simple. Mr. Dyke did not waive the filing of a financial
affidavit by Mrs. Dyke. Mr. Dyke was prejudiced. No record exists that competent
substantial evidence supports the final award because the wife and her attorney
deliberately did not have a court reporter present for the final hearing to deceive the
court. Mr. Dyke, in a letter to Judge Weinberg addressed from St. Ann’s Psychiatric
Hospital in England, objected to all of the above before the Final Hearing, asking for
a continuance and other relief.
Appellate Court Opinion Excerpt: We hold, as did the court in Gordon, that all
frauds on the court older than one year must be brought as an independent action
and not by motion in the original action.(1*)
Because the former husband has filed such and independent action, he has an available
forum to consider his allegations of fraud.(2*)
______________________________________________________
(1*) An exception to the one-year limit would be an action based on a fraudulent
financial affidavit. Fla. Fam. L.R.P. 12.540.
7
Michael Dyke’s Argument:
Michael Dyke’s attorney, at the instruction or suggestion
of the Honorable J. Michael Traynor, filed an independent action to toll the statute of
limitations in a tort, fraud, and legal malpractice case. This “independent action” is not
practicable and counsel cannot be required to finance same in money or time. The
undersigned attorney has moved to withdraw as counsel with the consent of Michael
Dyke in the independent action. Michael Dyke has not been able to find counsel to
prosecute this independent action. Both the trial and appellate courts suggest the
independent action be litigated thereby creating this “Catch 22" situation which
deprives Mr. Dyke of his only true remedy in the family court, leaving an absurd result
contrary to the Supreme Court decisions of Florida and the United States. Waterson
v. Seat and Crawford, supra; Holy Trinity Church v. United States, supra. Michael
Dyke has nowhere to go as this independent cause of action is against public policy
in that it turns a family law case into a contingency fee case against multiple defendants
and a jury trial. The wrong was done in the family court and should be dealt with in the
family court. Mr. Dyke is mentally ill, destitute, and homeless, without funds for
adequate medical treatment.
Appellate Court Opinion Excerpt:
While it may have been an effort for the court
to proceed without a financial affidavit from the former wife, we conclude that the
lack of such an affidavit does not deprive the trial court of jurisdiction and that any
error was waived by the failure of the husband to object at the time of the final
hearing. See Vaccaro v. Vaccaro, 677 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996).
______________________________________________________
(2*) See Anderson v. Anderson, No. 00-59 (Fla. Jan. 9, 2003) recognizing the one year
window provided by rule 1.540 for filling motions for relief from judgment based on
allegations of fraud.
8
Michael Dyke’s Argument:
Michael Dyke requested help and a first-time
continuance from Judge Weinberg whilst a mental patient in St. Ann’s Royal
Psychiatric Hospital in England which was ignored. This is in direct conflict with
Andrade v. Andrade, supra; Goldberg v. Goldberg, supra; Cohen v. Cohen, supra;
Wilkes v. Wilkes, supra.
CONCLUSION
Michael Dyke has been prejudiced by the wife Ann Dyke’s refusal to follow
Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure 12.285(d) requiring the service of a financial
affidavit and supporting documents in any proceeding for “equitable distribution of
assets.” There was no waiver of the mandatory financial affidavit, no competent
record to support award in this complicated divorce with a significant marital estate.
The instant decision is in direct conflict with Varrieur v. Varrieur, supra; and Wilkes
v. Wilkes, supra; therefore, Michael Terrance Dyke requests the Supreme Court of
Florida grant jurisdiction. The Supreme Court Rules were meant to be followed.
Michael Dyke, while a mental patient in St. Ann’s Royal Psychiatric Hospital in
England requested a first-time continuance from Judge Weinberg which was ignored.
The Court failed to protect the mentally incapacitated by not requiring that the
dissolution be delayed. This instant decision is in direct conflict with Andrade v.
Andrade, supra, Cohen v. Cohen, supra; and Goldberg v. Goldberg, supra; therefore
Michael Terrance Dyke requests the Supreme Court of Florida grant jurisdiction.
Michael Dyke, a homeless mental patient, has neither the funds nor the fortitude
to pursue an independent action. To insist the relief from the final judgment be sought
in a civil malpractice suit is in direct conflict with The Supreme Court of Florida’s
decision in Waterson v. Seat and Crawford, supra; and the Supreme Court
of the United States decision in Holy Trinity Church v. United States, supra. This
instant decision deprives Michael Dyke of a real or meaningful remedy for a wrong by
following a rule to the letter of law even if it leads to an absurd result; therefore,
Michael Terrance Dyke requests the Supreme Court of Florida grant jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court should reverse appellate and trial court and order the
appellate and trial court to award Michael Terrance Dyke one-half (½) of the marital
assets at the time of the dissolution, one-half (½) of the profits of The King’s Head
British Pub, Inc. from time of the dissolution, and attorney’s fees and costs, both as
enforcing settlement agreement the parties entered into and as equitable distribution.
Leave a Review / Google
"Check out the book, read the Original Court Documents, take a peek in the kitchen, write a review ... Just remember: Don't be fooled by the Royal accent."
What is the truth about
The Kings Head British Pub?