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.)

Hand-Pulled Noodle Case Slowly Unraveling.

Longtime readers know we have been tracking Mr. Chow's long hand-pulled noodle-like passage through the SD FL for some time now.

There have been several substitutions in the cast of characters fondling handling this matter.

Now it appears the defendants may be running out of money; at a minimum they have run out of Richman Greer's good counsel, as that firm has recently withdrawn from the case.

Methinks all is not well in noodle-land.

SFL Friday -- Achtung Baby!

Well it's been an eventful week and a huge Valentine's weekend looms -- I hope you all have a fantastic long one (that didn't come out quite right but you know what I mean).

Real quick before I go, I'm no foreclosure litigation expert but this seems like a basic no-no:

"They found that many cases were being filed by plaintiffs that didn't own the mortgages any more," said Miami lawyer Mark Romance, who chairs the Civil Procedures Rules Committee.

Romance said other cases were being filed against people who no longer owned the homes.

At least they got the service of process right!

(actually, they screwed that up too)

You can see the new foreclosure rules and forms here.

What else -- I got a bit of a Nazi tingle, these new Valentine's rules are very confusing, Howard Stern would definitely not like this woman, and I would argue some addictions are totally ok.

Shower the people you love with love, kids.