Shuster & Saben obtains Dismissal of Foreclosure Action

For Immediate Release:
The law firm of Shuster & Saben has obtained the dismissal of a foreclosure lawsuit filed against the firm’s Brevard County client. The Plaintiff / Lender filed suit against our client in an attempt of take their Cocoa, Florida investment property. In the subject action, after the lender drastically raised our client’s interest rate (to well over 8% A.P.R.), our client was unable to continue to afford to make monthly mortgage payments. Our client had financed the property with an A.R.M. (Adjustable Rate Mortgage) that was linked to the LIBOR index, and faced an increase in their interest rate after their initial rate expired. Despite the fact that interest rates declined from 2007 to 2009, the lender still raised the client’s interest rate to a point that it was no longer affordable. Several months after the client stopped making mortgage payments the lender filed a Notice of Lis Pendens and a Complaint for Foreclosure in the Brevard County Circuit Court.

The client consulted with several other Space Coast attorneys before choosing Shuster & Saben to defend the foreclosure action. After Shuster & Saben filed its notice of appearance and voluminous discovery requests the lender decided to dismiss the case and cancel the lis pendens. Counsel for the lender advised that the lender has decided to write off the loan. To view the actual Notice of Dismissal click here.

The Return of Scott Rothstein!

His head fully cleared, Scott just touched down from parts unknown and is being whisked to his law firm, which is back to business as usual, if your law firm is routinely surrounded by SWAT teams in bulletproof vests.

BTW, Bob Norman's reporting on Scott from the get-go has been exceptional.

I love the detail ("he flew in on a G-5").

Boy I hope he takes a white Ford Bronco to his office, as some readers have suggested.

Such excitement!

Professor Donald Jones Sues ATL!

Anyone remember that old arrest involving UM Law Professor D. Marvin Jones?

The one everyone told me they already knew about and I was such a schmuck for not being clued in?

Yep, that one.

Well as David reports here, and our friend Guest Blogger at MaL does too, the ole' Perfesser has decided to go pro se and sue AboveTheLaw in Miami federal court!

You can read the complaint here, which is pending before Judge Cooke.

ATL's prior coverage on Professor Jones is collected here.

Call me crazy, but this one's easy; I have a feeling you don't even have to go all-Iqbal-chronic to make it fade away.

See, Arlen Specter was right -- Conley v. Gibson works just fine.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled Scott Rothstein programming.

UPDATE: Here's a fantastic analysis of the glaring deficiencies in Professor Jones' complaint by lawyer/blogger Ben Sheffner.

Are You Ready For Some More Rothstein?

Sheesh, media coverage of our friend Scott Rothstein is reaching almost canoodling beach priest levels -- but without the sexy bikini photos.

Raise your hand if you think Scott is returning today from his sojourn in exotic Morocco.

(tumbleweed blows slowly across vacant western town.....)

Ok, me neither, but this one is far from over.

It's interesting to see Rothstein's 50 percent equity partner Stuart Rosenfelt's public statements about this mess. I like this one from the WSJ:

"Scott was good at spending money, but he wasn't that good," Mr. Rosenfeldt said, alluding to Mr. Rothstein's flamboyant lifestyle.

And this one:

"When I met Scott he was already rich," Mr. Rosenfeldt said. "He told me he made a killing on stock." But, Mr. Rosenfeldt adds, "I now have to examine everything [Mr. Rothstein] told me."

Yep, I would say that's a pretty good idea.

BTW, the photo above is of Scott in his $5k suit.

Is it just me or did he way overpay?

Jim DeFede has more here.

Plus, if you want to see the kind of work product Kendall can put together in a weekend, you can read Coffey's short but (bitter)sweet complaint on behalf of the firm here.

This One's For Scott Rothstein!

I got a few requests for a Zep video, and naturally Kashmir sorta seemed right (although it's somewhere near India, not Morocco where Scott is rumored to be, hopefully "clearing his head").

But then I came across this video about a lovely train trip through the Moroccan countryside, sung by two very sober and upright gentlemen who obviously are very fond of that country.

If you're out there Scott, feel free to let us know how you're doing.

How (Not) To Recuse A Judge

So I see that Congress is taking at look at revising the federal recusal guidelines:

The House Judiciary Committee, led by Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., is planning a hearing on federal recusal guidelines amid controversies that have swept through state court systems in recent years, culminating in a U.S. Supreme Court decision five months ago that tightened the recusal requirements for elected state judges.

The Judiciary Committee's interest marks the first time Congress has flirted with recusal guidelines since a high-profile scrap in 2004 between congressional Democrats and Justice Antonin Scalia. In a debate that broke along partisan lines, Democrats said that Scalia should have recused in a case involving then-Vice President Dick Cheney because he and Cheney were part of a group that went duck hunting in Louisiana while the case was pending. Nonprofits seeking records from Cheney's energy task force eventually lost, 7-2.

Under the current system, federal judges get to decide on their own whether to disqualify themselves from cases. Among the proposals being discussed are requiring a second judge to rule on a recusal motion -- rather than leaving the motion to the "targeted" judge -- and making substitution automatic if any party to a case swears an affidavit alleging prejudice. Some lawmakers, including Conyers, have also said in the past that they want a system to review recusal decisions by U.S. Supreme Court justices.

This effort parallels an ongoing review by the Bar's Judicial Administration and Evaluation Committee of Florida state court recusal procedures. The committee is looking at the "second judge review" option but also a system of automatic recusal:

The committee has been looking at Florida’s recusal rules and met with Geyh, an acknowledged expert in the field, via teleconference on October 8. The Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee also attended the meeting. The JAEC and the Rules of Judicial Administration and Education Committee have formed a joint subcommittee to work on the issue.

JAEC members have expressed concerns that it is unfair to ask a judge who is subject to a recusal motion to rule on it, and that it can also create an unfavorable perception by the public. They have also said the system can be abused by judges and can complicate and add expense to litigation.

Geyh said there are two main alternatives to Florida’s system. One — which has been discussed by the committee — is to bring in a second judge to decide the recusal motion. That choice may involve having the initial judge decide the facial sufficiency before referral is made, he said.

The second method is to give the parties the equivalent of a peremptory challenge. That is, Geyh said, they can ask to have a judge replaced without giving a reason, as long as they act soon after the case is assigned. But if they want the second judge replaced, they face a higher standard of showing a presumption of bias by the judge.

“There is very little disqualification litigation after that [the peremptory challenge],” he added.

That system is used in about 20 states, mostly in the West. Interestingly, judges in states without the peremptory challenge don’t like the system because they get no say about being removed and the accompanying appearance of bias. But judges in states that use the system, Geyh said, tell him, “‘We’re ultimately indifferent with the idea that the litigant is uncomfortable with us for whatever reason. They get one shot only, and they don’t need to demean me by making up excuses.’

“You get a new judge and the only way you’re going to get another judge is by the old way of showing presumption of bias.”

We've all been there. You get a judge that -- for whatever reason -- has got to go, but how to do it?

I think it's apparent, at least in state court, that the system needs revision. And I've had cases in states where you have a certain number of days to reject the judge for no stated reason, and that system does seem to work.

What do you all think (or do you all just want to keep talking about Scott Rothstein)?

Blockbuster Allegations At RRA!

Happy Monday, folks!

I don't know about you, but I woke up full of piss 'n vinegar today.

Maybe it was the drive in to downtown this morning.

Here's what I brought with me in my luxury hermetically-sealed personal transport vehicle:

1. Large cup of freshly-brewed Sumatran coffee;
2. Various briefs and drafts I worked on over the weekend;
3. Today's NYT (and parts of Sunday), as well as the WSJ;
4. Laptop, smartphone, and my e-book reader.

I also had the ac and Led Zep's Coda on at full-blast.

I'm not proud of this, but yes -- I multitasked.

The big news this morning is Bob Norman's blockbuster reporting regarding RRA:

The Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler law firm has hired prominent lawyer and former U.S. Attorney Kendall Coffey to represent it in what he called "very very difficult circumstances" caused by an imploding investment venture by the firm's president, Scott Rothstein, who is believed to be in Morocco.

"The allegations [against Rothstein] do not involve the firm's law practice, they involve an investment business that Scott Rothstein created," said Coffey, who contacted the Pulp this evening. "There are a number of allegations being made and I'm trying to assess the firm's position and what steps it may need to take."

When asked if the firm's lawyers feel victimized by Rothstein, Coffey answered simply, "Yes." It's a near certainty that victims of Rothstein's investment scheme will sue the law firm and possibly even individual lawyers -- whether on solid ground or not -- in an attempt to get their money back.

Coffey said the law firm will be open for business Monday, but said it's too early to tell if the firm will survive. Other sources say that the firm is filing for bankruptcy Monday.

Bob's prior coverage is here, the Herald's coverage is here, and the Sun-Sentinel (after love jobs like this one) finally gets to it here.

Not to be outdone, I covered high-flyer Scott's public embrace of expensive suits and his deep personal interest in the message communicated by associate facial hair here.

So Bob, that makes us even?

UPDATE:

Jay Weaver writes of the complaint filed today by Coffey and an email by Chief Judge Tobin:

The complaint states, ``It is with surprise and sorrow that the attorneys of Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, P.A., have learned that Scott W. Rothstein, the managing partner and CEO of the firm, has, according to assertions of certain investors, allegedly orchestrated a substantial misappropriation of funds from investor trust accounts that made use of the law firm's name.''

The case will be heard at 4 p.m. before Judge Jeffrey Streitfeld.

Rothstein's partner, Stuart Rosenfeldt, is seeking immediate judicial action to facilitate the investigation of investor funds.

The firm was founded by Rosenfeldt and Rothstein in 2002 and currently employs more than 70 lawyers.

The complaint also states that a review of the firm's records undertaken this past weekend showed various funds that were controlled by Rothstein could not be accounted for. ``Some investors allege that defendant Rothstein may have been fabricating nonexistent structured legal settlements for sale to investors,'' the claim states.

Rothstein's actions were done without any knowledge of any other attorneys at the firm. ``And, in fact, Rothstein actively endeavored to hide the existence of the scheme,'' the claim says. Rosenfeldt and other lawyers only learned about the allegations several days ago, they said.

Broward Chief Judge Vic Tobin sent an email at 6:45 a.m. to judges about the Rothstein case.

`'I learned of some very distressing news yesterday....,'' Tobin wrote. ``Whoever draws the case try to set the motion today because of the amount of clients and money involved. Also if you have a case with te firm please be patient. I don;t know if they lawyers will come or not and if they do come there is no money at this point to go forward with the case or pay firm employees.''

Tobin also write that there may be ``multiple filing of receivership motions'' and that creditors may also file a motion.

News crews were outside the law firm's Las Olas Boulevard office in Fort Lauderdale Monday. They were not allowed access to the firm's office. No one was answering the phone at the firm.

Gotta love South Florida.