New Trial Motion Filed in Luke Campbell Case!

Alternative basis for motion -- Campbell's attorney Richard "Elusive Butterfly" Brodsky moved around too much during trial (seriously):

By way of example, during examination of one witness, counsel for Defendant stood up and walked around the courtroom and toward the jury looking for some item, interrupting the testimony being presented, until he was directed to return to his seat by the Court. Similar inappropriate conduct was the norm, rather than the exception, during trial.

There's more -- Brodsky also allegedly disrupted "the flow": 

counsel for Defendant interrupted direct and cross examinations conducted by counsel for Plaintiffs for improper purposes and in an untimely and inappropriate manner. Said interruptions made it very difficult for counsel for Plaintiffs to maintain “a flow” during said direct and cross examinations which was a large concern with LUTHER CAMPBELL since LUTHER CAMPBELL was very evasive and easily distracted.

Needless to say, Brodsky doesn't agree, describing these arguments as "absurd and fatuous" (coincidentally, also the name of Brodsky's first band back in high school).

Luther Campbell Doesn't Really Care Much For Judge Cooke.

It's true we broke news of and have been actively covering the Luke Campbell case that Richard Brodsky masterfully tried before Judge Cooke, but now Uncle Luke, a columnist at the very fine Riptide, breaks his silence over the controversy and has some harsh words for Judge Cooke:

When I finally heard about the allegations, I fought to vacate the judgment and dismiss the case.

The judge refused me, ruling there was enough evidence to send the case to trial. It didn't look good for Miami's favorite uncle. So I hired Richard Brodsky, former attorney of the Securities and Exchange Commission, to defend me. At that point, I had spent a lot of money, and knew I would have to spend a lot more.

When the trial began two weeks ago, Butler was allowed to talk about her job, child, and community service. The photographer was afforded the same opportunity. But when I was on the stand, the judge instructed my lawyer to stop asking me questions about myself. She said that information was irrelevant.

I respect some judges, but not all of them. There is always a chance you'll get one who doesn't like you, your political leanings, or your core values. I would rather face a jury of my peers, who can debate the merits of the argument and come to an unbiased conclusion. In my case, the jury saw through the judge's power play.

Me:  Be a gracious winner.  You won the case, for chrissakes!  You don't need to slam Judge Cooke for her "power play," whatever that means.  Litigants don't really hold equal power with the presiding judge in a federal case, anyways.

Also, and I'll let my buddy Brodsky weigh in on this if he's so inclined, but maybe the judge let in evidence of the plaintiff's background because it went to her damages?

Just take the "W" and move on.

BTW, I'm happy Luke spent a lot of money on Richard -- it was evidently worth every penny.

Your Daily Morning Luke Campbell Verdict Form.

Luke Campbell Verdict Form

A fresh read (along with your coffee).

Note -- excessive use of exclamation points temporarily suspended due to mockery by David O. Markus.

Uncle Luke Wins Trial!

Full defense verdict!

Luke Campbell Case In Trial!

Luke Cambell Evidence Lesson

Trial again on Monday before Judge Cooke, and on the eve of week two new counsel Richard Brodsky submits a tutorial on the difference between authenticity and admissible hearsay:

The issue is whether the two returns of service, in the forms of affidavits from a process server, are admissible.  In denying the Defendant’s objection to the admissibility of these documents as hearsay, the Court stated that they are self-­‐authenticating, and therefore admissible under Fed.R.Evid. 901.  Respectfully, this is a fundamental misconception of the purpose of Rule 901.

I feel like I'm back in my evidence class!

Luke Campbell Has a New Lawyer!

Happy Monday, plebes.

Canes, turkey etc. etc., welcome back to the real world.

In said real world, noted elusive butterfly and quality attorney Richard Brodsky has landed to defend the honor and dignity (and money) of Luther Campbell, filing a notice of appearance in the case brought by Aueishua Butler pending before Judge Cooke.

This is good news for Luke, who now has a steady hand and experienced federal litigator on his side.

My guess is Richard will not just answer the complaint, but bring a counterclaim, serve a huge bunch of financial discovery, schedule the plaintiff's depo and generally be all aggressive in moving this thing forward to a reasonable resolution.

But what the hail do I know?

BTW Richard, about that photo -- you look great, but either straighten that tie or roll up those sleeves!

Luke Campbell Loses Motion to Dismiss!

Luke Campbell Order

Well it appears Judge Cooke has ruled and given Luke Campbell an early Thanksgiving gift -- a big fat goose egg:

Plaintiffs argue that Campbell is liable for the negligence of the Luke Corporations under Florida’s business judgment rule, Florida Statute § 607.0831. “Under the business judgment rule, directors are presumed to have acted properly and in good faith, and are called to account for their actions only when they are shown to have engaged in fraud, bad faith, or an abuse of discretion.” Cottle v. Storer Commc’ns, Inc., 849 F.2d 570, 574 (11th Cir. 1988).

Count II of the Amended Complaint alleges that Campbell willfully and recklessly failed to use reasonable care in performing his duties as the sole corporate director for the Luke Corporations. Count II further alleges that Campbell acted in bad faith and that the proximate result of Campbell’s actions have lead Plaintiffs to be damaged in an amount in excess of $400,000.00 plus interest and costs. The allegations of personal negligence set forth in the Amended Complaint are sufficient to satisfy the business judgment rule. Therefore, I find that Count II survives the Motion to Dismiss.

First the Canes and now this!

Judge Cooke Allows Lawsuit Against Luke Campbell To Proceed!

Looks like UM-loving Luke Campbell may be in some legal trouble again.

Plaintiff Aueishua Buckner has sued Luke's companies over alleged unauthorized appropriation and use of her image.

Now the plaintiff wants to sue Luke personally, but Luke apparently was not cooperative with her discovery efforts, leading to this order from Judge Cooke:

Now, on the eve of trial, Plaintiffs wish to amend the Complaint to remove the Luke Corporate Defendants and pursue the action against Luther Campbell for personal liability, personal negligence, and fraudulent transfer so that the pleadings conform to the evidence offered during trial. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(b). In light of the discovery challenges Plaintiffs have faced in this case, I find no reason to deny Plaintiffs’ request for leave to amend the Complaint as the Defendants, who at all times were aware of the recently disclosed information, will not be prejudiced.

Luke is represented by Chris Benjamin of The Brown Law Group.