Friday, January 23, 2015

Talking Football with Judge Rosenbaum!


You're on sports talk 11 with Judge Rosenbaum!! -- news and weather on the nines -- caller what's your question?

Can you win a football game with a crappy defense?
On the football field, a team with a weak defense may choose to emphasize its offense. The trouble is, in the end, it can be hard to win without a reliable defense.
But Judge, how does that relate to a statute of limitations defense exactly?
Defendants’ statute-of-limitations defense is, by no means, a certain winner. So their offense—that they will suffer prejudice as the result of a voluntary dismissal without prejudice because they will lose their statute-of-limitations defense—necessarily falters since it depends on their unreliable defense.
Ok, thanks for the call!

Next up after the break -- we'll be discussing Brady's deflated balls!


Thursday, January 22, 2015

So Prince Andrew Allegedly Had an Orgy With Jeff Epstein's Sex Slave.


It's not often you get to write a headline like that.

Wow this case was already insane but reading the allegations in this affidavit just lifted it to another level:

Actually I can't bring myself to quote any of it.

The allegations about Dershowitz are equally insane.

In related news, Jack Scarola tried to serve Buckingham Palace, with predictable results:
Jane Doe 3 said she hoped that Andrew would accept what she was saying now that it has become public. “Given what he knows and has seen, I was hoping he would simply voluntarily tell the truth about everything. I hope my attorneys can interview Prince Andrew under oath about the contacts and that he will tell the truth,” she wrote.

Her lawyer, Jack Scarola, has written to Prince Andrew asking him to submit to questioning but court documents show that Federal Express was unable to deliver the letter to Buckingham Palace as it was “refused by the recipient” when it arrived this month.
Good lord.


Q & A With Spencer Aronfeld (Now With Moderate Facial Hair!)


I have a few cruise ship questions:

1.  Can I die boarding the ship?

2.  Can I die while rolling at the craps table?

3.  Can I die on the waterslide?

4.  Can I die while snorkeling?

5.  Can I die from eating a frittata off the midnight buffet?

6.  Can I die while sleeping peacefully in my cabin?

(I'm sure there are others.)

Wednesday, January 21, 2015

Love Judge For Sale



In capitalism's purest form, everything has a price.
The Florida judiciary is no stranger to misconduct and corruption. During one tawdry stretch in the early 1970s, three of the state’s supreme court justices resigned over corruption scandals. One was caught on a gambling junket in Las Vegas that had been paid for by a greyhound track owner with a case pending before the court. Two others stepped down after trying to tamper with cases involving campaign supporters. 
In response to these and other embarrassments, Florida passed significant reforms, including a law banning judicial candidates from personally asking potential campaign donors for money. Like similar laws in 29 of the other 38 states where at least some judges are elected, it was a straightforward way to reduce a serious threat to judicial independence. 
And yet this law may soon become the latest victim of the post-Citizens United era, where money is speech and more of it is only better. 
On Tuesday, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a case challenging Florida’s personal-solicitation ban as a violation of the First Amendment. The lawsuit was brought by Lanell Williams-Yulee, a lawyer who was disciplined for writing, signing and sending a fund-raising letter to voters in 2009, when she was running to be a county court judge.
Read the rest here.

3d DCA Watch -- Wednesday Morning Coming Down.


Hi kids it's that time when the bunker once again intrudes right into the middle of our work week.

And they don't even ask or anything!

Ok, let's humor them and listen politely to what they have to say so we can get back to work:

Gonzalez v. Barrenechea:

Judge Suarez' dissent is so good they printed it twice!

(Better click quickly before they correct it.)

Miccosukee Tribe v. Bermudez:

Rare tribal victory on taxable costs issue.

American Heritage v. Morales:

Basically don't drink and do anything, or the insurer will apply the alcohol exclusion and deny your claim.

Happy Wednesday!!!

Tuesday, January 20, 2015

Just What Can You Consider on a 12(b)(6) Motion Nowadays?



We all know that attacking jurisdiction under 12(b)(1) is a new tactic to bring in the kitchen sink when confronting a newly-filed complaint, but just how far can you go with extrinsic documents under a traditional 12(b)(6) analysis?

Turns out pretty darn far:
For purposes of Rule 12(b)(6) review, which applies to conduct alleged to have occurred on or after March 23, 2010, a court generally may not look beyond the pleadings. See Garcia v. Copenhaver, Bell & Assocs., M.D.’s, P.A., 104 F.3d 1256, 1266 n.11 (11th Cir. 1997). The pleadings include any information attached to a complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(c); Crenshaw v. Lister, 556 F.3d 1283, 1291 (11th Cir. 2009). We have explained, however, that a district court may consider an extrinsic document even on Rule 12(b)(6) review if it is (1) central to the plaintiff’s claim, and (2) its authenticity is not challenged. SFM Holdings, Ltd. v. Banc of Am. Sec., LLC, 600 F.3d 1334, 1337 (11th Cir. 2010). In addition, a district court may consider judicially noticed documents. Bryant v. Avado Brands, Inc., 187 F.3d 1271, 1278 (11th Cir. 1999).

Here, the district court considered documents that were attached to Mr. Osheroff’s amended complaint and were part of the pleadings. The court also took judicial notice of the complete list of documents in the defendants’ unopposed motion for judicial notice, including five Miami Herald articles, two advertisements in the Miami Herald, the transcript of a hearing in another case involving a defendant clinic in state court, and the Special Master’s Report in that case.4 None of these documents was improperly considered for the purposes of a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.
Ads and a transcript from state court?

Just what exactly would have been considered improper for the district judge to consider?

This feels like a bad trend.

Judge Angel Cortinas, Unplugged

DLE Miami Stars :: Interview with Angel Cortinas :: Season 1 Episode 2 from 5801 Productions on Vimeo.

Monday, January 19, 2015

These Boots Are Training Lawyers to Be Docents!


It's a new year and I've decided to "accentuate the positive" with a heartwarming story about a guy who just wants to share his art:
Miami attorney Alan Kluger has turned his law office into an art museum with renowned contemporary Latin American paintings, sculpture and photography.

While displaying art in law offices is nothing new, Kluger's collection is so impressive that it's like a retrospective art show unto itself.

He has plans to open the office of Kluger, Kaplan, Silverman, Katzen & Levine on weekends to tour groups, targeting family members of those in Miami to attend various conventions. Kluger is already contacting nearby hotels.

"We are going to train lawyers and their spouses to be docents and give tours of the art collection," he said.
Why the hail not?

(The mere practice of law is overrated.)

Let me try out for the job:  "The bathrooms are located straight ahead to your right."


Oh I kid -- the guy's got chutzpah and we need more -- not less -- art in the world.

I say "good on you."


Saturday, January 17, 2015

Friday, January 16, 2015

I Hear Wedding Bells!



Big news here folks!
The U.S. Supreme Court today announced it has granted review of all six marriage equality cases decided by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, including two Ohio cases litigated by Lambda Legal, the ACLU and Gerhardstein & Branch. 
The two cases are Henry v. Hodges, where Lambda Legal joined Gerhardstein & Branch, and Obergefell v. Hodges, where the ACLU joined Gerhardstein & Branch. Oral argument is expected to take place later this year. 
The Court also granted review in DeBoer v. Snyder, a Michigan case litigated by private counsel and Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), Bourke v. Beshear and Love v. Beshear, Kentucky cases litigated by private counsel and the ACLU, and Tanco v. Haslam, a Tennessee case litigated by private counsel and the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR).
2015 will be the year we get marriage equality from sea to shinning sea!