Thứ Ba, 31 tháng 5, 2011

Judge Cooke To Decide Important Issues of "Body Darkness Prejudice."



Folks I've been slammed today so I apologize for getting this up a little late.

Let's see, the 11th upheld certain Florida statutory caps on noneconomic damages in med/mal cases, but also certified a few issues to the Florida Supremes because -- surprise -- these issues are "unsettled":
Plaintiffs next challenge the cap under several provisions of the Florida and United States Constitutions. We first address Plaintiffs’ argument that the cap violates the United States Constitution. We then review Plaintiffs’ challenge to the cap under the Takings Clause of the Florida Constitution, Art. X, § 6, because Florida constitutional law on the matter is well settled. Florida constitutional law on the other provisions of the Florida Constitution under which Plaintiffs challenge the statutory cap, however, is unsettled. For this reason, we will certify several questions of state constitutional law to the Florida Supreme Court under its certification procedure.
(Shh, don't tell Governor Scott.)

But the more significant story, of course, is one man's quixotic fight against "body darkness prejudice" at our public parks and beaches, now undressing unfolding in Judge Cooke's courtroom.

Fight the power (and do it the way God intended)!

Thứ Sáu, 27 tháng 5, 2011

Wonder Who Wrote This Order?



Here's how oral argument went in front of the 3d on that Carona/Suarez thing:
At Thursday’s hearing, the three appeals judges grilled Corona’s lawyer, William Petros, who could not get a word in edgewise before the sharp questions began.

“Is there any basis whatsoever” for withholding the results? Judge Alan Schwartz asked.

“How is [Corona] possibly harmed if the votes are released?” added Judge Frank Shepherd.

“The public would have knowledge that could later be disavowed,” Petros responded.

“So what?” Shepherd replied. Later, he added: “Does your client not have confidence in the electorate of this county?”

“Yes,” Petros answered.
Ouch.
 
And poor Judge Thomas, I don't think the 3d liked his injunction very much:
The injunctive order under review is totally deficient in form....and entirely unsupported by substantive law.
Hmm, so the order is not just deficient, it's "totally deficient."
 
And it's not just unsupported, it's "entirely unsupported."

Wonder which judge on the panel writes like that?

New Photo of Daniella Atencia Found!



(Boy it really is slow around here.)

What's Wrong With This Paralegal Assistant?



This has to be one of the stupidest moves a trial lawyer can make, right up there with the Joseph Rakofsky internet self-immolation:
A Chicago lawyer says his opponent in a small claims case is using an unfair tactic by sitting a buxom woman next to him at counsel's table.

Attorney Thomas Gooch says the woman's sole purpose "is to draw the attention of the jury away from the relevant proceedings" — a dispute over a used car. He asks Cook County Circuit Judge Anita Rivkin-Carothers to order the woman to sit in the gallery with other spectators.

In responding to the pretrial motion, attorney Dmitry N. Feofanov said the woman is his paralegal assistant and contends Gooch cites no "good faith legal argument" why she can't sit at counsel's table. Feofanov, who in the past has described himself as a "consumer protection lawyer," asked Rivkin-Carothers to impose sanctions on Gooch for his motion.
This is like a comic asking management to remove a heckler!

It's your job to deal with distractions in the courtroom, not by filing some bone-headed motion with no evidentiary basis whatsoever, but by stepping up your game and making your case even mildly interesting.

Have you tried humor, direct eye contact, calling witnesses that are worth paying attention to, introducing some sense of drama, tension, or anticipation -- anything like that?

BTW,  I happen to really like the Jack Benny glasses, and the whole men's dress shirt and jacket thing is a very nice touch.

Seriously, what kind of lawyer files a motion like this?

Thứ Năm, 26 tháng 5, 2011

Tampa Federal Conviction Reversed by United States Supreme Court

Conviction Overturned on Appeal
Tampa Defense Attorney / Lawyer previously reported here a team of Defense Attorneys from Tampa, Florida went to the United States Supreme Court seeking to overturn a conviction. Today we find out the case was overturned. Congratulations to Steve Crawford and Tampa Appeal Attorney / Lawyer Ken Siegel. The complete Opinion is available as a free download here:


FOWLER v. UNITED STATES

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

No. 10–5443. Argued March 29, 2011—Decided May 26, 2011

While preparing to rob a bank, petitioner Fowler and others were discovered by a local police officer, whom Fowler killed. Fowler was convicted of violating the federal witness tampering statute, which makes it a crime “to kill another person, with intent to . . . prevent the communication by any person to a [Federal] law enforcement officer” of “information relating to the . . . possible commission of a Federal offense,” 18 U. S. C. §1512(a)(1)(C). Rejecting Fowler’s argument that the evidence was insufficient to show that he had killed the officer intending to prevent him from communicating with a federal officer, the Eleventh Circuit held that a showing of a possible or potential communication to federal authorities was sufficient.

Held: In such circumstances, the Government must establish a §1512(a)(1)(C) violation by showing there was a reasonable likelihood that a relevant communication would have been made to a federal officer. Pp. 3–10.

(a) In a §1512(a)(1)(C) prosecution, “no state of mind need be proved with respect to the circumstance . . . that the law enforcement officer is an . . . employee of the Federal Government,” §1512(g)(2). Thus, the Government must prove (1) a killing, (2) committed with a particular intent, namely, an intent (a) to “prevent” a “communication” (b) about “the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense” (c) to a federal “law enforcement officer.” P. 3.

(b) Nothing in §1512(a)(1)(C)’s language limits it to instances in which the defendant has some identifiable law enforcement officers particularly in mind. Any such limitation would conflict with the statute’s basic purpose. Witness tampering may prove more serious (and more effective) when the crime takes place before the victim has engaged in any communication at all with officers—at a time when the precise communication and nature of the officer who may receive it are not yet known. Hence, the statute covers a defendant, like petitioner, who kills with intent to prevent communication with any and all officers. The Court must consequently decide what, if anything, the Government must show about the likelihood of a hypothetical communication with a federal officer where the defendant did not think specifically about any particular communication or its recipient. Pp. 4–7.

(c) To determine what the Government must prove in such instances, the Court looks to the dictionary definition of the statutory word “prevent,” which means rendering an “intended,” “possible,” or “likely” event impractical or impossible by anticipatory action. No one suggests that the word “intended” sets forth the appropriate standard here. The Government and the Eleventh Circuit would rest their standard on the word “possible.” But that standard would eliminate the independent force of the statutory “federal officer” requirement, and would extend the statute beyond its intended, basically federal, scope. Fashioning a standard based on the word “likely” is consistent with the statute’s language and objectives. Thus, where the defendant kills a person with an intent to prevent communication with law enforcement officers generally, that intent includes an intent to prevent communications with federal officers only if there is a reasonable likelihood under the circumstances that, in the absence of the killing, at least one of the relevant communications would have been made to a federal officer. The Government need not show that such a communication, had it occurred, would have been federal beyond a reasonable doubt, nor even that it is more likely than not. But it must show that the likelihood of communication to a federal officer was more than remote, outlandish, or hypothetical. Pp. 7–10.

(d) Because Fowler’s argument that the evidence is insufficient to satisfy a “reasonable likelihood” standard was not raised at trial, the lower courts must determine whether, and how, the standard applies in this case. P. 10. 603 F. 3d 883, vacated and remanded.

Looks Like Jeremy Alters Has Finally Made It!



And by "made it," I'm not referring to his firm's role in the recent BoA checking overdraft settlement preliminarily approved by Judge King the other day, I'm talking about getting sued for a percentage of the fees that may be recovered down the road:
As an exhibit, the suit includes a copy of a contract between Campos and Alters' former firm, Alters Boldt Brown Rash Culmo. The agreement stipulates Campos agreed to work exclusively for Alters to develop potential cases.
"Campos brokered significant relationships on behalf of … Alters ... in Latin America such as top members of the government, law firms, attorneys and other noteworthy persons who were instrumental in the origination of cases pursued by the Alters law firm as a result of its agreement with Campos," the complaint said.
Hmm, these things don't ordinarily end too well for anyone involved.

This part isn't too good either, if true:
Campos y Asociados also alleges it originated the Bank of America lawsuit pending before U.S. District Judge James Lawrence King and is entitled to a 25 percent origination fee. Alters acknowledged the class action was originated by Campos in an email Aug. 21, 2008, according to the suit.
Alters has hired Andy Hall, who has moved to dismiss the suit claiming these are foreign attorneys unauthorized to practice law in Florida, and thus the contract is illegal or unenforceable?

If so wouldn't that leave a quantum meruit or unjust enrichment-type claim?

Thứ Tư, 25 tháng 5, 2011

3d DCA Watch -- Yawn.



I'm starting to get bored by the lack of hot civil legal matters to talk about recently.

It's true there's a certain toe-tapping trial ongoing in the SD FL, but nearly every darned thing is being filed under seal.

Wonder why that is?

So onward to the bunker.....
Affirmed.  See random case cited for no apparent reason.
That's pretty much what you're looking at this week.

Oh yeah, there's your typical case where the insurer is trying to take advantage of a poorly-drafted statute to screw an insured, but that's a dog-bites-man story.

Surely someone, somewhere, can help out with something interesting going on in this town?

Ruden To Save Money By Closing Things!



Ruden McClosky has found a sure-fire way to save money, according to the Intrepid One™close offices!

Here's how it works -- when you close offices and fire people, you don't have to pay as much out in monthly overhead.

Why didn't Adorno Yoss figure this out?

(Wait a minute, they did.)

Here's the firm-wide email from chief muckety-muck Michael Krul:
I am pleased to provide you with the following confidential update.
Oh boy, that's a guarantee some angry partner will be emailing it around town.
Although we will continue to make sure that we are operating as efficiently as possible, we believe that our staffing level is now appropriate and do not anticipate that the firm will have any need to seek staff reductions in the near future and, hopefully, not for the long term. The inflow of new work is on the rise and our timekeepers are increasing their recorded time. This is a positive sign for improved revenues down the road.
Honey, I have great news!  My boss says "our staffing level is now appropriate" and they don't anticipate "staff reductions in the near future."

Unlike last year, we're going to make it through Hannukah.  Isn't that fantastic?

"Shut up and get me a drink."

Thứ Ba, 24 tháng 5, 2011

Criminal Attorney Lawyer 33572

Criminal Defense Attorney needed in Apollo Beach, Florida 33572? Casey Ebsary is a Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer who can help with cases Near Apollo Beach. Casey's office is conveniently located with free parking in the Channelside District, a few blocks from the Hillsborough County Courthouse.

Tell Me Your Story. 813-222-2220.

Apollo Beach Criminal Defense Attorney Lawyer 33572



View Larger Map

Criminal Defense Lawyer 33572

Criminal Attorney Lawyer 33510

Criminal Defense Attorney needed in Brandon, Florida 33510? Casey Ebsary is a Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer who can help with Criminal Charges Near Brandon. Casey's office is conveniently located with free parking in the Channelside District, a few blocks from the Hillsborough County Courthouse.

Tell Me Your Story. 813-222-2220.

Brandon Criminal Lawyer Attorney 33510



View Larger Map of Brandon Florida 33510

Criminal Defense Lawyer Attorney 33510

Criminal Attorney Lawyer 33625

Criminal Defense Attorney needed in Citrus Park  in Hillsborough County, Florida 33625? Casey Ebsary is a Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer who can help with Criminal charges in or Near Citrus Park. Casey's office is conveniently located in the Channelside District, minutes from the Hillsborough County Courthouse.

Tell Casey Your Story. 813-222-2220.

Citrus Park Criminal Lawyer Attorney 33625



View Larger Map of Citrus Park 33625

Criminal Defense Lawyer 33625

Criminal Attorney Lawyer 33615

Criminal Defense Attorney needed in Town N Country  in Hillsborough County, Florida 33615? Casey Ebsary is a Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer who can help with Criminal charges in or Near Town N Country. Casey's office is conveniently located in the Channelside District, minutes from the Hillsborough County Courthouse.

Tell Casey Your Story. 813-222-2220.

Town N Country Criminal Lawyer Attorney 33615



View Larger Map of Town N Country Hillsborough County Florida

Criminal Defense Lawyer 33615

Criminal Attorney Lawyer 33611

Criminal Defense Attorney needed in Bayshore Beautiful in Tampa, Florida 33611? Casey Ebsary is a Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer who can help with problems in or Near Bayshore Boulevard. Casey's office is conveniently located in the Channelside District, minutes from the Hillsborough County Courthouse and close to Bayshore.

Tell Casey Your Story. 813-222-2220.

Bayshore Criminal Lawyer Attorney 33611



View Larger Map of  33611 Bayshore Beautiful

Criminal Defense Lawyer 33611

Criminal Attorney Lawyer 33609

Criminal Defense Attorney needed in Parkland Estates in Tampa, Florida 33609? Casey Ebsary is a Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer who can help with problems in or Near Parkland Estates. Casey's office is conveniently located in the Channelside District, minutes from the Hillsborough County Courthouse and close to Parkland Estates.

Tell Me Your Story. 813-222-2220.

Parkland Estates Criminal Lawyer Attorney 33609



View Larger Map of Parkland Estates Tampa Florida 33609

Criminal Defense Lawyer 33609

Happy 70th Birthday Bobby D!



Who hasn't, at one time or another, thrown it all away?

Judge Cohn Certifies Class of Gulfstream Poker Dealers.


 This doesn't seem like much of a claim, but allegedly Gulfstream does not properly pay the right portion of tips to their poker dealers, who apparently already make $32 per hour:
Defendant opposes notification for several reasons. First, Defendant argues that Plaintiff has failed to meet his burden that other individuals wish to opt in to this lawsuit.  Defendant contends that because Plaintiff and other poker-dealers make $32 per hour already, they would not be concerned with the potential recovery of an extra $1 per hour if they opted in to this action. Second, Defendant contends that Plaintiff has failed to identify a specific individual who desires to opt in to this action. Finally, Defendant argues that because it has already offered to settle this action with Plaintiff and the poker-dealer affiants for full FLSA damages and attorney’s fees, the action is essentially moot.
You shouldn't count other people's money, but on the other hand that's pretty good coin!

Why'd you go to law school again?

Thứ Hai, 23 tháng 5, 2011

Criminal Attorney Lawyer 33618

Criminal Defense Attorney needed in Northdale or Carrollwood in Florida near 33618? Casey Ebsary is a Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer who can help with cases Near Carrollwood or Northdale. Casey's office is conveniently located  in the Channelside District, near the Hillsborough County Courthouse.

Tell Me Your Story. 813-222-2220.

Criminal Lawyer Attorney 33618



View Larger Map of Northdale or Carrollwood 33618

Criminal Defense 33618

Law Updates for May 20, 2011

Zeigler, 36 FLW 1029, 2nd DCA, Sentencing Vindictiveness.  Sentence greater than referenced by defense counsel when originally announcing that def wanted to enter open plea.  Presumption of vindictiveness in this case arose, although record did not show that judge initiated plea negotiations, he advocated that def enter open plea by warning def of potential consequences of proceeding to trial and made remarks which evidenced departure from role of impartial arbiter by endorsing strength of State's case and telling def that he would "rue the day" he decided to exercise his constitutional right to a trial.

Hart, 36 FLW 1033, 1st DCA, Joinder of offenses.  Trial court abused discretion in granting State's motion for a single trial offenses of sex battery, kidnapping, agg battery, and armed robbery against one victim with a charge of carjacking against the other victim.  Although the two criminal episodes were separated only by a few hours and a couple of blocks, these factors were not sufficient to prove a proper and significant link between the crimes.  The mere fact of temporal and geographic proximity is not sufficient itself to justify joinder except to the extent it proves a proper and significant link between the crimes.

Boyington, 36 FLW 1036, 1st DCA, Community control - Error to revoke based solely on allegation that def changed address without permission where there was no showing that it was willful and substantial where def incarcerated in another county during the relevant period.





The Law Offices of Roger P. Foley,P.A.

Your New Circuit Court Judge!



Congratulations Michael Hanzman!

Tale of Two Headlines: Checking Overdraft Update...or Herman Russomanno Looked White Hot!



So who else saw Herman Russomanno looking quite dapper at the Heat game last night?

LOVE the white jacket and red hankie!

In other SD FL news, the plaintiffs in the Checking Overdraft litigation, in light of new bank motions to arbitrate filed after the Supreme Court's Concepcion decision, are arguing waiver (of course) but also that the Supreme Court didn't fundamentally change the law in the 11th Circuit:
Simply put, Concepcion did not change the law of arbitration enforceability in the vast majority of the relevant states. For example, Concepcion changes nothing in states such as Florida, Georgia, Texas and others, where certain Plaintiffs reside. These states have never adopted a rule even closely resembling Discover Bank’s per se rule against class action waivers.
What do you think -- does this argument hold water?

Thứ Bảy, 21 tháng 5, 2011

Criminal Attorney Lawyer 34601

Criminal Defense Attorney needed in Hernando County, Florida 34601? Casey Ebsary is a Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer who can help with criminal cases in Hernando County 34601. Casey is experienced in handling Criminal cases near the Brooksville, Florida courthouse.

Tell Me Your Story. Toll Free 1-877-793-9290.

Brooksville Courthouse | Criminal Attorney Lawyer 34601























View Larger Map of Hernando Brooksville FL 34601

Hernando Criminal Defense Attorney Lawyer Brooksville 34601

Justice Thomas Thinks Fat, Dumb Low-Wage Deputy Sheriffs Love His Opinions!



I don't know if it's a product of age or just creeping cynicism, but I'm starting to think almost any self-aggrandizing war story is complete bull$%@&.

Take, for example, this utterly implausible anecdote shared by Justice Thomas that just happens to perfectly illustrate an absurd point that the Justice seems to be making about himself -- that his writings are so plain-spoken and easy-to-understand that even menial, random service employees hang on his every word:
He said his own style was accessible to everyone, a point that is open to dispute. Consider, for instance, the opening sentence of his most recent opinion: “The False Claims Act (FCA), 31 U.S.C. §§3729 — 3733, prohibits submitting false or fraudulent claims for payment to the United States, §3729(a), and authorizes qui tam suits, in which private parties bring civil actions in the government’s name, §3730(b)(1).”

In the interview, Justice Thomas provided evidence that his writing is easy to grasp, including a remembered airport encounter with a man he assumed to be a law enforcement official.

“He looked like a deputy sheriff,” Justice Thomas said. “He had a little midriff going.”

“Here’s a guy,” the justice went on, “who looked like he clearly didn’t go to college, who said that ‘I’ve read all your opinions.’ Well, that’s accessibility.”
So we're supposed to believe Justice Thomas bumps into Sheriff Buford T. Justice at an airport and the guy just starts raving about his work and this perfectly validates an imagined point in your mind about how your writing resonates with the common man?

"I loved it when you ruled that if I take bad medicine my claim is pre-empted!"

"Remember that case where you limited my rights if I get discriminated against -- that rocked!"

"That time you slashed punitive damages against Exxon for dumping all that oil in Alaska, me and my boys still chuckle about that."

Whatever you say, Your Honor.

Thứ Sáu, 20 tháng 5, 2011

SFL Friday -- Ready for the Rapture!



It's kinda slow around here, other than the end of the world and everything.

But I'm ready, having spent many hours of my youth poring over the great illustrator Basil Wolverton's brilliantly disturbing images of the Apocalypse.

Plus I've seen the Omen III at least twice over the years.

So bring it, plebes -- it's been a good run.

See you all tomorrow?

Attorney Lawyer 33563

Criminal Defense Attorney needed in Plant City 33563? Casey Ebsary is a Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer who can help with cases Near Plant City. Casey was a prosecutor in the Plant City County Courthouse.

Tell Me Your Story. 813-222-2220.

New Courthouse Plant City Attorney 33563


View Larger Map of 33563

Criminal Defense Attorney Lawyer 33563

Law Updates for May 13, 2011

Brown, 36 FLW 935, 4th DCA, Self-defense - Trial court erred in giving the standard instruction for self-defense, instructing jury that self-defense was only authorized only if injury to the victim occurred where injury was not an element of the crime, and State argued such.  Error was fundamental, negated def's sole defense to the crime-Battery LEO case.

Moss, 36 FLW 940, 4th DCA, Statements of the defendant - Error to deny motion to suppress custodial statement def gave to  police after he said "I want to talk to a lawyer." Post-invocation statements cannot be used.  Waiver: def did not subsequently waive the privilege where the def did not reinterate  the exchanges with the police, instead interrogating officer continued to question the def without pause and subtly undermined the request for a lawyer in various ways.  Not harmless

Walker, 36 FLW 984, 1st DCA, Where the def sought to suppress evidence flowing from stop of her vehicle, because stop was conducted by an off-duty policemen acting outside his jurisdiction. Trial court erred in denying motion where the mutual assistance agreement was not presented to the court until after the motion to suppress.  Her due process was denied, as the def could not challenge  the authenticity, continued validity, or statutory compliance of the evidence.



The Law Offices of Roger P. Foley,P.A.

2d DCA Says Richard Catalano Can Blare His Car Stereo Really Loud!



Poor Clearwater attorney Richard T. Catalano.

All he wants to do is drive down an idyllic, country St. Petersburg road and blow his ear drums out by blasting his car stereo at full volume.

What could be more American than that?

Well, now the 2d DCA agrees, though it has certified a question to the Supremes:
IS THE "PLAINLY AUDIBLE" LANGUAGE IN SECTION 316.3045(1)(a), FLORIDA STATUTES, UNCONSITUTIONALLY VAGUE, OVERBROAD, ARBITRARILY ENFORCEABLE, OR IMPINGING ON FREE SPEECH RIGHTS?
Helpfully, the 2d suggests the answer is yes:
Turning our attention to the Florida statute at issue, on its face it is not content neutral. The statute excepts from its provisions "motor vehicles used for business or political purposes, which in the normal course of conducting such business use soundmaking devices." § 316.3045(3). In other words, an individual using a vehicle for business purposes could, for example, listen to political talk radio at a volume clearly audible from a quarter mile; however, an individual sitting in a personal vehicle that is parked next to the business vehicle is subject to a citation if the individual is listening to music or religious programming that is clearly audible at twenty-five feet.  Clearly, different forms of speech receive different treatment under the Florida statute.  That is, the statute in question does not "apply equally to music, political speech and advertising," which is what the Supreme Court requires in order for the statute to be deemed, "content-neutral." See City of Cincinnati, 507 U.S. at 428.
This seems like a no-brainer.

I mean, who does St. Petersburg think it is, Coral Gables?

Thứ Năm, 19 tháng 5, 2011

Sorry Folks, Court's Closed!



Who cares about stupid foreclosures in Palm Beach County anyways?

(Judge Tobin?)

That bald-headed moose of a Governor shoulda told ya.

Have You Ever Experienced "Premature Discovery Dispute" Syndrome?



I'm not ashamed to admit that I have.

What can I say, sometimes a person gets excited!

(It's not where you start, it's where you end.)

The first step, however, is to acknowledge you may have a problem, like our friend the witty Magistrate Judge Goodman does here:
Some discovery motions are brought to the Court too early. The discovery disputes at issue here fit into that category. As musically noted by well-known singer-songwriter Tom Petty, “the waiting is the hardest part.”2
I really love footnote 2, this is why Judge Goodman's orders are such fun:
The lyric is from the song “The Waiting,” the lead single from Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers’ album Hard Promises, released in 1981. Although now 30 years old, the song is still used in popular culture. It was featured in at least one promotional spot for the fifth season of the television situation comedy “The Office” and is used at Philadelphia Flyers home games (when officials are reviewing a play). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_ Waiting_(song) (last visited 5/16/2011). See also http://www.lyricstime.com/tom-petty-the-waiting-lyrics (last visited 5/16/2011).
Can you imagine being Judge Goodman's clerk on this matter:

"Quick, I need you to research recent cultural references to an old Tom Petty song.  What?  Ok, Tom Petty was a singer a long time ago.  You mean they didn't teach you this in law school?  Welcome to my world."

Judge, you are welcome to guest blog here anytime.

Thứ Tư, 18 tháng 5, 2011

Criminal Defense Attorney 33626

Criminal Defense Attorney needed in Westchase 33626? Casey Ebsary is a Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer who helps with charges in and near the Westchase area. Casey's office is conveniently located in the Channelside District near the Courthouse.

Tell Me Your Story. 813-222-2220.

Defense Attorney 33626



View Larger Map of Westchase 33626

Criminal  Defense Lawyer 33626

3d DCA Watch -- Key West is Different Edition!



For no particular reason whatsoever, we proudly present today's "intemperate, impatient, undignified and discourteous" 3d DCA Watch:

State Farm v. Caboverde:

The 3d reverses Judge Areces' grant of a new trial in a case where State Farm got a defense verdict.

The reasoning should be useful as precedent for trial courts and litigants in guiding how to handle these motions in the future:
Having considered the entire record, together with the trial court’s findings in its order granting a new trial, a clear showing has been made that the trial court abused its discretion in granting a new trial. We therefore vacate the order granting a new trial, and remand this cause with instructions to reinstate the jury’s verdict.
BTW, I totally agree with Justice Thomas that lawyers who don't read opinions suffer from "a disease of illiteracy or laziness."

I mean, how can you pass this stuff up?

Western & Southern Life v. Beebe:

Be careful how you draft your fee agreement.

Trinidad v. Florida Peninsula:

Be careful how insurance companies draft their insurance policies.

Hardin v. Monroe County:

Of course a case from the Keys has been pending for two decades(!), they tend to lose track of time down at land's end.

Criminal Defense Attorney 33556

Criminal Defense Attorney needed in Odessa, Florida 33556? Casey Ebsary is a Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer who can help with cases Near Odessa. Casey's office is conveniently located  in the Channelside District, minutes from the Hillsborough County Courthouse.

Tell Me Your Story. 813-222-2220.

Criminal Defense Lawyer Attorney 33556



View Larger Map Odessa 33556

Criminal Defense 33556

Parsing the 1st DCA Taj Mahal JQC Charges.



It's never a good thing for a judge or lawyer to be hauled before a disciplinary committee, but for judicial car wreck onlookers the charging document against 1st DCA Judge Paul Hawkes is an interesting read.

Travis Pillow over at the Florida Independent has a nice summary, which includes this personal favorite:
On one occasion you demanded that the deputy marshal buy you a bottle of vinegar. The purpose was to clean your personal coffee pot. The deputy marshal refused, but you demanded that you be shown in writing why she, could not buy you a bottle of vinegar. She showed you that she was not authorized to purchase personal items for individuals. Even though she refused to buy you a bottle of vinegar, you continued to mention it to her and to harp on her refusal to buy you the vinegar.
And the problem is?

First of all, everyone knows the best way to clean a coffee pot is with lemon juice ice and salt -- has this guy ever worked in a restaurant?

Secondly, and I don't know about you, but to me this sounds like every boss I ever worked for when I was in high school.

Let's continue:
Hawkes allegedly tried to get a free trip to Indiana, courtesy of a company that had just sold the court thousands of dollars worth of new furniture. The chief judge at the time nixed his travel plans, and Hawkes allegedly “tried to intimidate” court marshal Don Brannon (who helped oversee budget matters) to change his version of events surrounding the planned trip during a closed-door meeting. Hawkes told other court employees “that no such trip was ever under consideration.” The fallout from that incident and Hawkes’s “coercive and intimidating” manner eventually prompted Brannon to resign.
My reaction:  see above.

But seriously -- we are talking Indiana.

I like this part best:
Hawkes’ conduct and behavior “demonstrated a pattern of conduct that can only be characterized as intemperate, impatient, undignified and discourteous,” the JQC alleged.
Come on!

"Intemperate, impatient, undignified and discourteous"  -- those are the precise qualities I look for in a judge.

(Mark Romance has already received my letter endorsing same.)

Thứ Ba, 17 tháng 5, 2011

Mike Kosnitzky Flies Often! (End of Post.)



What, you think there's more to the story?

I don't know, hard to say.

Ok, there is this:
Since I almost always travel alone, I’m often asked by other passengers if I could change my seat. If a middle-aged couple says that they are married and want to fly sitting next to each other, I say that they have been together for so long that I’m sure that they could overcome the separation anxiety for a few short hours.

If a younger married couple wants me to change, I say that “absence makes the heart grow fonder.” If an unmarried couple asks me, I say that I only make exceptions for married people. 
You silver-tongued devil!

But all hope is not lost -- every rule has its exceptions:
I have made a few exceptions recently, once for an elderly couple, and another time for a couple where the husband just had stomach surgery. 
I understand this -- lawyers are superstitious and air travel is tough enough as it is.

However, if you do happen to see Mike on a plane and you want to change seats, act really old or really sick and see what happens.

Safe travels!

"The Situation" Sues His Dad (With Richard Wolfe's Help)!

The Situation Dad Complaint


Courtesy of our friends at Riptide, it appears that Jersey Shore's "The Situation" has sued his polite, exceedingly charming father in the 305 and has hired our own Richard C. Wolfe to prosecute dear old Daddy.

The case is before Judge Huck.

Can you imagine the father appearing before Judge Huck pro se?

Here's a taste of what Judge Huck can expect:

Engrossed verion of HB 7207

Here's a link to the final, engrossed version of the Growth Managment Act bill that will go to the Governor.

Tips for Old Lawyers!



In a nod to Frank Ramos' entertaining and informative new blog, I offer the following tips for those of us who are old (or merely "old at heart"):

1.  Act like an enormous big shot.

Nothing screams success like immodesty!

2.  At judicial receptions and other Bar events, always refer to judges by their first names -- preferably diminutive nicknames.

This both diminishes their respect and enhances yours!

Bonus -- try to imply that you are the reason they are on the bench in the first place.

"Oh I remember young Freddie Moreno when he was just a wee circuit court judge."

3.  Make sure you cover all big hearings even if you are not prepared and have to look back constantly to the junior partner or senior associate behind you at counsel table who actually knows everything about the case.

This makes you look good before the Court and also you can blame your colleague for not getting you sufficiently prepared for the hearing.

4.  Always -- always -- expect to coast on your reputation and/or credibility.

The reality is your mere presence in the courtroom comes with a presumption of correctness that no facts or binding caselaw can dislodge.

5.  If you are a litigator, have the following three war stories ready:

     A.  The judge was incompetent but the jury saw through to your brilliance.

     B.  The jury was incompetent but the judge saw through to your brilliance.

     C.  Both the judge and jury were incompetent but you won anyway (see below).

 6.  Eat at Loggia's.

(I actually agree with that last one.)

Now go make a name for yourself!

Thứ Hai, 16 tháng 5, 2011

Foreclosure lawyers at Shuster & Saben obtain dismissal of HSBC’s Foreclosure Action.

Things did not go very well for HSBC or their counsel, Elizabeth R. Wellborn, P.A., when a Melbourne, Florida homeowner retained the law firm of Shuster & Saben, LLC to defend the foreclosure action filed against his Brevard County, Florida home. Within 48 hours of the firm being retained firm attorney Richard Shuster served nearly twenty pages of discovery requests, including requests for admission, requests for production and interrogatories (written questions to be answered under oath) about the factual basis of the lawsuit served against the homeowner and the securitization of the mortgage into the Ace Securities Corp Home Equity Loan Trust. When HSBC’s counsel was unable to answer the discovery within thirty days they filed a motion for extension of time but did set their motion for hearing. To prevent the motion for extension of time from sitting in limbo, our firm submitted an unopposed order grating the motion and ordering HSBC to respond to the discovery within thirty days.

Thirty days after the Court signed the order, our firm had little in the way of discovery as rather than answer the questions and provide the requested documents, HSBC’s attorneys objected to almost all of the discovery requests Shuster & Saben made on behalf of the homeowner. Firm attorney, Richard Shuster then filed a twenty-eight page Motion to Show Cause and to Compel Better Response to Request to Produce that set forth each of the discovery requests, HSBC’s objection to each request, an argument as to why the Court should overrule the objection and a check off blank for the judge or overrule or sustain each objection. After a lengthy hearing the Court overruled many of HSBC’s objections and commanded HSBC and its attorney, Ira Silverstein, to provided better responses within thirty days.

When, HSBC and its counsel failed to comply with the Court’s second order, foreclosure defense lawyer, Richard Shuster filed a Second Motion to Show Cause which detailed the bank’s violations of the Court’s last two discovery orders and requested dismissal of the entire case.

On May 3, 2011, a hearing was held at the Brevard County Courthouse. Firm attorney Richard Shuster appeared at the hearing in person and a staff attorney at bank’s law firm appeared by phone. The Court asked the bank’s attorney if HSBC was “thumbing its nose” at the Court’s orders. The Court did not give the bank a third chance to violate another Court order and dismissed the bank’s foreclosure action. The Court also granted sanctions against the bank. Now that the case against our client has been dismissed his modest legal expenses will stop. Once sanctions are recovered we will hopefully be able to reimburse our client a substantial portion for his legal expenses from the sanction award.

To review a redacted copy of the order dismissing HSBC’s case please click the link below.

Redacted Order

About Shuster & Saben: The foreclosure defense lawyers at Shuster & Saben aspire to vigorously and aggressively defend every foreclosure case. We have offices in Miami, Fort Lauderdale, and Melbourne so that we can appear in Court in person rather than by phone when our client’s home is on the line. If your case is in a part of the state where we do not appear in person for Court we can refer you to a likeminded attorney or co-counsel with a carefully selected local counsel.

The BankAtlantic Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions.



This is a very interesting read, particularly in light of recent efforts to return Rule 11 to the mandatory/no safe harbor regime we had in place during the go-go 80s, which many argue was a bust for reasons having little to do with having any judicial sympathy for vexatious litigants.

Chủ Nhật, 15 tháng 5, 2011

BREAKING -- 3d DCA To Disclose Oral Panelists Before Next Week's Calendar!



It's true I was absolutely mesmerized to learn of the intricate details of the 3d DCA's construction in the riveting lecture "Appreciating Concrete:  An Hour-By-Hour Account of How the Bunker Was Born!" during the recent Third DCA Historical Society luncheon, so I may have missed something minor in what was an otherwise highly informative event.

That's why I was surprised to hear from a tipster that Chief Judge Ramirez apparently also said something about the 3d now disclosing who will sit on its oral argument panels starting the Wednesday before the next week’s calendar.

The first panel up for May 16 arguments is Schwartz, Schwartz, and Schwartz.

Good luck all.

I kid, I kid!

Actually, it will be Suarez, Lagoa and Emas.

See, this is what happened when you get caught up in a debate over whether it's more important to have a relatively high compressive strength, or a lower tensile strength, and what is the proper coefficient of thermal expansion.

For gosh sakes, will that argument ever end?

Thứ Sáu, 13 tháng 5, 2011

Loud Car Stereo Law Silenced | Defense Attorney | Complete Opinion Here

Criminal Defense | Noise Law Struck
Defense Attorney / Lawyer in Tampa, Florida has completed a review of the recent declaration by a Florida Appeals Court that  Florida Statute 316.3045(1)(a) was unconstitutional. The Traffic law made operation of radios or other mechanical sound making devices or instruments in vehicle plainly audible at a distance of 25 feet or more from the vehicle illegal.

The Feds have written a 50 page Manual on how to enforce laws like the Florida Statute that has been invalidated. You can check that tome about Car Stereo Law Enforcement out here.

The court found the statute unconstitutional. The statute exempted business and political speech and the exemptions do not serve a compelling state interest, the statute is not content-neutral, and is an unconstitutional suppression of protected speech.

The complete Noise Ordinance Decision is available here from a Criminal Defense Attorney as a Free Download.

Is the Law in your Traffic Case Valid? Call Me Toll Free to Discuss. 1-877-793-9290 .

Case Excerpts:

"[S]ection 316.3045, Florida Statutes (2007). . . restricts the volume at which a car stereo system may be played on a public street, but it exempts vehicles being used for business or political purposes, which in the normal course of conducting such business use soundmaking devices. "

The statute provides: "Operation of radios or other mechanical soundmaking devices or instruments in vehicles; exemptions — 

(1) It is unlawful for any person operating or occupying a motor vehicle on a street or highway to operate or amplify the sound produced by a radio, tape player, or other mechanical soundmaking device or instrument from within the motor vehicle so that the sound is:

(a) Plainly audible at a distance of 25 feet or more from the motor vehicle; or (b) Louder than necessary for the convenient hearing by persons inside the vehicle in areas adjoining churches, schools, or hospitals.

(2) The provisions of this section shall not apply to any law enforcement motor vehicle equipped with any communication device necessary in the performance of law enforcement duties or to any emergency vehicle equipped with any communication device necessary in the performance of any emergency procedures.

(3) The provisions of this section do not apply to motor vehicles used for business or political purposes, which in the normal course of conducting such business use soundmaking devices. The provisions of this subsection shall not be deemed to prevent local authorities, with respect to streets and highways under their jurisdiction and within the reasonable exercise of the police power, from regulating the time and manner in which such business may be operated.

(4) The provisions of this section do not apply to the noise made by a horn or other warning device required or permitted by s. 316.271. The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall promulgate rules defining "plainly audible" and establish standards regarding how sound should be measured by law enforcement personnel who enforce the provisions of this section.

(5) A violation of this section is a noncriminal traffic infraction, punishable as a nonmoving violation as provided in chapter 318."

"The circuit court carefully considered each argument and concluded that the issue ruled on by the two district courts was essentially the same, i.e., whether the "plainly audible" standard was too vague and overbroad to pass constitutional scrutiny. "

"Additionally, while recognizing our agreement with the reasoning and conclusion reached by the circuit court, we note that section 316.3045 suffers from a more fundamental infirmity.  "

"A case that is directly on point, and was cited favorably in Cannon, is People v. Jones, 721 N.E.2d 546 (Ill. 1999).  In that case, the court held that a sound amplification statute, which prohibited the use of sound amplification systems in motor vehicles that could be heard from a specified distance away from a vehicle and which contained an exception for vehicles engaged in advertising, was a content-based regulation of speech, in violation of the First Amendment."

"Turning our attention to the Florida statute at issue, on its face it is not content neutral.  The statute excepts from its provisions "motor vehicles used for business or political purposes, which in the normal course of conducting such business use soundmaking devices."  § 316.3045(3).  In other words, an individual using a vehicle for business purposes could, for example, listen to political talk radio at a volume clearly audible from a quarter mile; however, an individual sitting in a personal vehicle that is parked next to the business vehicle is subject to a citation if the individual is listening to music or religious programming that is clearly audible at twenty-five feet.  Clearly, different forms of speech receive different treatment under the Florida statute.  That is, the statute in question does not "apply equally to music, political speech and advertising," which is what the Supreme Court requires in order for the statute to be deemed, "content-neutral."  See City of Cincinnati, 507 U.S. at 428."

"Additionally, we conclude that the statute is a content-based restriction on free expression which violates the First Amendment."

Is the Law in your Traffic Case Valid? Call Me Toll Free to Discuss. 1-877-793-9290 .

Source: 36 Fla. L. Weekly D991a
Criminal Defense Attorney | Lawyer

SFL Friday -- I Like Exactly HALF This Picture!



Dang does Frank dress up nice!

I'm so pissed at Blogger for eating my posts and making me have to focus today almost exclusively on (1) my cases; and (2) deciphering the contents of Osama's porn stash.

Nearly as interesting as what's hawt right now in Abbottabad is this genuinely amusing defamation suit filed against the Internet.

Even better, our local intertubular representative in this epic legal fiasco is none other than bashful Brian Tannebaum.

Given the heavy hitters comprising the "Rakofsky 74" I am quite certain they will be ably represented, either by themselves or by that fabulous Coral Gables restaurateur Marc Randazzao.

This is the legal equivalent of Charlie Sheen -- someone needs to stop the train before it runs off the cliff.

(Let's see when -- or if -- Blogger posts this.)

Thứ Tư, 11 tháng 5, 2011

More bills on their way to the Governor

Ok, no analysis here, but I've identified a number of bills of interest (well, maybe) to land use practitioners that passed both houses and are on their way to the governor.  I've tried to provide links to the PDF versions of the enrolled bills; they are from the Senate site (even for the House bills), which is a little easier to use.

In no particular order:

My favorite -- Bill that reenacts the burden/standard of proof in impact fee cases from the 2009 legislation.

Bill that clarifies (probably expands) the scope of the Ag exemption for stormwater management and wetland permitting.  I think this is an outgrowth of the Duda Ranch case from last year.

Bill that limits building official's authority to require inspections of residential structures when a permit is requested for other structures on the same site.   There MUST be a horror story behind this one.

Bill addressing affordable housing agencies, trust funds AND GMA requirements in 163.3177.   The planning aspects seem benign; I can't tell about the rest.

Bill addressing substantive and procedural issues with the Florida Building Code.    This includes some things that look complicated with respect to the adoption of national codes and standards.

The "Vacation Rentals" Bill.   The preemption only applies to new regulations and frankly I don't know if the langauge actually prevents a local government from requiring vacation rentals to be in commercial zone districts.

Inside this Bill that requires e-filing by state attorneys and public defenders is a new requirement for attorneys to file all petitions and pleading with DOAH electronically

I'm sure that there are other fun bills that I've missed - let me know your favorites.

Best
Robert

3d DCA Watch -- The Passing of the Old Medicine Ball.



It's a slow day inside the bunker as everyone tearfully says their goodbyes to Judge Gersten.

As has been the ritual for many decades, the judges have gathered to solemnly present the departing jurist with their favorite piece of used exercise equipment, thus cementing a bond and punctuating a friendship forged across courtrooms, across chambers, and across mechanical rooms/storage closets.

"Hope you can use my old calisthenics mat!"

"Please use my jazzercise tape in good health."

"Let me know if they also have a shot put lunch club at Bilzin!"


And, given the ceremonies attendant to this momentous occasion, the 3d had time to emit only a single, lonely civil written utterance, one dealing with the technical differences between writs and the Court's jurisdiction to hear an appeal.

What better way to send off Judge Gersten than to tell the litigants to try again and repeat the whole process once your appeal is ripe.

(Actually, thank you Judge for your hard work and dedicated public service.)

Best Man For the Job.



Let's see, if I were the Governor and wanted to appoint someone to the South Florida Water Management District, which oversees an annual budget in excess of $1 billion(!), who would be my ideal candidate?

For sure I'd want someone who has never belonged to any organization -- ever -- that works on environmental or water issues.

I'd definitely want someone who is opposed to the historic purchase and restoration of 27,000 acres of Everglades currently owned by U.S. Sugar.  In fact, I'd want someone who was a featured speaker at a protest rally against the purchase.

I'd want someone who runs a Tea Party organization that is opposed to all environmental regulation and may possibly be a stealth front group for special interests.

I'd want someone who wants to slash the water district's budget so it can't do anything to help the Everglades.

I most certainly would want someone opposed to any regulation of greenhouse gases, and who wants to repeal the cap-and-trade regulatory program that reduces greenhouse gas emissions from electric utilities.

I'd want someone who heads a political organization that won't disclose its big-money donors:
Jumping into this political fight and mimicking the arguments of Florida Crystals is the not-for-profit Tea Party in Action, out of Boynton Beach. The group has produced a 30-second spot attacking Gov. Crist and the deal. Under Florida law, the group doesn't have to identify its donors. In an interview, Tea Party in Action Chairman Jim Moran refused to do so. So much for the tea party hating politics as usual.
Yes sir, I'd want Boynton Beach estate planning attorney Jim Moran!

Congratulations Florida.

Bài đăng phổ biến