L'Affaire Galleria Mall $36 Polo -- Resolved!

This has to be one of my favorite South Florida judicial scandals of late:

Last year, Fort Lauderdale attorney Lawrence ''Chris'' Roberts alleged that Seidlin solicited kickbacks in exchange for appointments as a special public defender on cases. Attorneys are paid $350 per case for such appointments.

Although appointments from Seidlin netted Roberts more than $72,000 between April 2001 and July 2004, the most serious allegations hinged on a DUI case eight to 10 years ago.

According to Roberts, Seidlin asked the attorney to buy him a $36 polo shirt from the Galleria Mall. In exchange, Seidlin would give him a favorable ruling, Roberts alleged.

Those alleged details are simply too precious -- can justice really be bought so cheaply here in South Florida? A $36 Polo at the Galleria Mall in exchange for a favorable ruling?

"How about an Everything bagel toasted with a schmear, and I'll throw in a summary judgment?"

But alas, the sobberin' former judge was completely cleared:

There was no record of Seidlin ever presiding over a DUI case, wrote Miami-Dade investigator Jim Futch in a close-out letter. Gov. Charlie Crist assigned the investigation to the Miami-Dade state attorney's office to avoid a conflict of interest.

Roberts also claimed Seidlin told him to buy a $1,000 purse for the judge's wife in exchange for three appointments a few years later. Months later, the judge asked for another purse costing $1,400. Those allegations were also unfounded, Futch wrote.

Investigators also looked into about $460,000 in gifts given to Seidlin's family by an elderly Fort Lauderdale woman that the family was caring for. Seidlin was cleared of any illegal activity in those transactions also.

Good stuff. My favorite part may be this:

He is rumored to be working on a court television show.

Umm, Judge Seidlin's 15 minutes were in 2007. In Hollywood terms that makes him older than ancient. I may not be Glenn Garvin but even I know that if Seidlin is still "working" on his TV show two years later it's probably long dead.

Hooray -- Former Bush Aide Now Gets to Nominate Dade Judges!

Hmm, I was reading this article from the DBR on the new 11th Circuit JNC members when something didn't seem quite right:

Three new Miami-Dade judicial nominating commission members have been appointed by Gov. Charlie Crist.

Rayfield McGhee of McGhee & Associates in Miami Gardens, GrayRobinson shareholder and Cuban American Bar Association president Marlene Quintana of Miami and Akerman Senterfitt associate Daniel Schwartz of Miami Beach were named to terms expiring in mid-2012.

Now the first two strike me as reasonable choices. But who is Daniel Schwartz? I have never heard of this Akerman associate. He's a 2004 grad and works in corporate, not litigation.

Ok, he must be some go-getter or really have some special credentials in order to be one of the chosen to nominate our trial judges to Governor Crist.

But then I saw this on his Akerman bio:

Prior Professional Experience
Executive Office of the President, The White House, Research Assistant to the Special Assistant to the President for Presidential Personnel, 2005-2006.

I am about to get all Carverriffic over this one.

....deep breath....deep breath..."Hello? I forgot my mantra!".....ok, I feel better now. Let's give Dan the benefit of the doubt and hope he's capable and willing to act independently and in the best interests of all of us.

Legal Recruiter Jorge Luna Writes Article Praising Jorge Luna

Hi kids! It's only the first Tuesday of the New Year and I already got one really bad order from a federal judge.

Oh well, the week's not over yet. Of course now we all have those meetings, depositions, lunch appointments, hearings etc. that we put off to the New Year coming in all at once.

Personally, I can't wait to hear what exciting developments Barry Mukamal has to share with me in the New Year (just teasing, Barry -- I'm actually looking forward to it!).

Let me ask you -- does anyone know a Miami legal recruiter named Jorge Luna? Of course I know and am very fond of those who comprise what I call "The Troika" -- Herb, Joe, and Abbe. But Jorge Luna is a new one on me.

Anyways, Jorge managed to pen an ode that appears to exclusively concern the formidable recruiting talents of....Jorge Luna:

I am working with a Harvard grad currently practicing at a prominent boutique firm in Pennsylvania. Harvard grads should have no problem getting a job, but if asked, I guarantee that she would tell you how important I have been to the process.

I found her a firm that she is excited to join, in the state (Florida) to which she is dying to return; I gave her vital information to prepare for the interview, which was a resounding success; and, spent time working with the hiring manager to come up with an offer, in terms of salary, that she can live with (or possibly be ecstatic about). In short, I have managed most every aspect of the process in a manner that allows her to do her job – be a lawyer. In turn, she has allowed me to do my job – be a recruiter – and it has made all the difference, as I have received tentative notice of an offer that I know she will be accept.

Of course, for every story such as those, attorneys or law firms will point to ten others that give recruiters a bad name.

I recall the candidate who wanted to meet me for lunch before giving me his resume. The last recruiter sent his resume all over town without permission and that fact, of course, got back to his boss. He was open to hearing about opportunities, but he wasn’t ready to burn his bridges yet again, and wanted to look me in the eye before deciding to trust me.

At least three of Florida’s top firms have recently called to let us know that, although hiring is slow at the moment, they are working almost exclusively with us. These firms have received from other recruiters enough bad resumes (clearly unqualified attorneys, attorneys in practice areas the firm don’t even have, etc.) to wallpaper the offices, and some firms have simply gotten into the habit of hitting delete when they see a particular email address. They know, however that when we send a resume, if nothing else, the person is worth considering.

Hmm, if it's "almost exclusive," doesn't that make it not exclusive? Note also that all his negative recruiter stories somehow rebound to his personal benefit.

I tell you what, if Jorge managed to get the Tampa Bay Examiner to print this column, then maybe he is as good a recruiter as he says he is.

Alimony Award Reversed by 4th Due to Income Disparity

The Fourth District Court today reversed the alimony award below in Kitchens v. Kitchens on the basis of the disparity in the parties' income it would create. The Court paid particular attention to the lower tribunal's inclusion of discretionary disbursements from retirement as income, drawing a clear line between mandatory IRA withdrawals due to age and discretionary receipt of funds from retirement.

15th Circuit Final Judgment Reversed for Lack of Findings

Among the reasons for reversal of the Final Judgment in Lift v. Lift today by the Fourth District Court were the award of alimony without findings as to income or statutory factors, the failure to make statutory findings regarding values and reasons for equitable distribution, and the disregard of various stipulations of the parties regarding equitable distribution, again found to be binding on the Court as well as the parties. Of particular interest was the Fourth District's rejection of the Court's award of half-shares of the marital veterinary business to each party despite a stipulation that the Wife would retain it at an agreed value. The Fourth District ruled that:

"Second, the parties correctly agree that the trial court erred in awarding each a half interest in the wife's veterinary business, thereby forcing them to be business partners. As we have previously held, compelling former spouses to remain in business together "creates [an] intolerable situation." Novak v. Novak, 429 So. 2d 414, 414-15 (Fla. 4^th DCA 1983); see also Manolakos v. Manolakos, 871 So. 2d 258, 260 (Fla. 4^th DCA 2004) ("[d]issolution of marriage being what it is, it is clearly an abuse of discretion for the trial court to order two parties who have stated that they do not want to continue to work together after their divorce to do just that")."

Judge’s Arrest Demanded Recusal, 4th DCA Rules

The opinion in Moskowitz v. Moskowitz released this week from Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal made clear that recusal is required not based on the actual existence of bias, but on a well founded fear of bias, in this case resulting in part from the Judge's arrest on marijuana charges. Of note is the Fourth District's statement that "We do not gainsay the striking improvidence of allowing the Judge to continue to sit on civil cases while criminal charges were pending against him. Yes, the Judge is entitled to the presumption of innocence in his criminal case. But that hardly generates a coincident supposition that litigants in cases over which he presides while his own criminal charges are unresolved need have no reason to fear his impartiality has been impaired. We are bereft of reasons to escape reversal on this ground."

Welcome Back, Plebes!

So how was your New Year's break? Mine was the usual, I won't bore you with all the gin-soaked cinematic details, but let me say this -- never, ever agree to go to a yoga class with the sports-intensive Alan Fertel.

That's all I'm gonna say about that.

Anyways, so what did we miss -- you already know the incredibly poor grudgeholder Judge Labarga is our new Supreme Court pick.

But did you know he really likes pictures of himself hanging in inappropriate locations:

Labarga joked that his commission on the 4th DCA takes effect Tuesday at 12:01 a.m. and his Supreme Court Commission takes effect exactly 24 hours later, so he will be a member of the 4th DCA for one day before he resigns.

He said he knows that the appellate court has photographs of all its judges on the wall of the court library and said “I want mine there” alongside the others, even though he will only be a judge there for a single day.

Umm, ok Judge, whatever you say. Would you settle for a caricature of yourself at The Palm? It doesn't cost the taxpayers anything and it's probably more fitting.

What else -- NEWS FLASH -- Models are better looking than most lawyers.

Perhaps news to some, though all you Carvermaniacs saw that one coming a mile away.

Of course, there is always the exception that proves the rule, as Sandy D'Alemberte pens an op-ed that does not cite or otherwise refer to his lovely and talented daughter. It did say some wise things about reforming the absurd process that led to a nearly chronic number of Jimenez posts on this crappy blog, but I know most of you don't care about all that law and policy mumbo-jumbo.

More coming. folks -- welcome back, everybody!