Judge Beau H. Oglesby today issued an opinion and order (10/14/2022) in the case of Thomas Janasek versus Ocean Pines Association, Inc., et al.

The opinion is a major victory for Tom Janasek and yet another court win for Ocean City attorney Bruce Bright in a string of cases filed on behalf of association members against OPA.

The opinion and order mean that OPA cannot prevent Janasek from using OPA food and beverage amenities for some period of time, a decision made by the prior OPA Board of Directors based on a verbal altercation at the Yacht Club where Janasek confronted then board member Josette Wheatley. Wheatley subsequently obtained a court "Peace Order" against Janasek.

This court order on the Temporary Restraining Order does not end the case. However, it is likely that OPA and/or Janasek will now seek some out-of-court settlement. Look for a potential OPA Board of Directors' motion at some point to pay Tom Janasek's legal fees, and possibly more. There is perhaps also the possibility of some private monetary settlement. Time will tell.

Based on Oglesby's opinion, the prior OPA Board of Directors either acted with bad legal advice or ignored good legal advice. Oglesby almost seems to lay out just how OPA could or should have taken the action against Janasek.

Oglesby's entire opinion and order can be viewed via this link:

Janasek Case Court decision in favor of Tom Janasek in hearing related to Temporary Restraining Order

A few key decisions/comments by Oglesby:

Bad faith, yet again, by a second judge - "This Court finds that the Board acted in bad faith in enacting the ban against Plaintiff, and as such, the conduct of the Board justifies judicial review of that decision."

OPA likely to lose case - "As for the likelihood that the plaintiff will succeed on the merits, this Court finds the scales tip in favor of Mr. Janasek."

Different result if handled properly - "The Board’s hands are not tied in addressing conduct at OPA amenities and facilities. The Board still has an avenue of relief in this case even if Mr. Janasek succeeds on the merits. There is a Board Resolution that specifically addresses amenity policies. This Board Resolution gives the manager at each facility complete control of all activities under their supervision. Further, as discussed earlier, the Board can direct the general manager to address conduct issues."

Different result if handled properly - "This Court is not swayed by Defendants’ argument 'that the OPA Board was trying to foster a safe, family-friendly environment at its restaurant amenities, not only for OPA members, but also for the general public.' Defendants’ Closing Memorandum, p. 26. The ban enacted by the Board related to only three (3) amenities, the Yacht Club, the Beach Club, and the Clubhouse Bar and Grill. It did not prevent Plaintiff from being around other members of OPA or the general public at the remaining OPA facilities and amenities. If the Board truly wanted to create a safe environment, it would logically follow that Plaintiff would be banned from all amenities and facilities."

The Order - "ORDERED, that Plaintiff’s ordinary use and presence at OPA amenities and facilities (including those identified in the Board’s notice of the ban) shall not constitute and may not be treated by OPA, its Board, its employees, or its law enforcement agency as a trespass or other criminal matter during the pendency of this case."