Friday, October 15, 2010

SFL Friday -- He Went Out Ant-Hunting With His Elephant and Gun....



I can't believe we made it to Friday.

Let's get right to it:

I Scribd this so you can click on the link, but Magistrate Judge Brown has scheduled a hearing on whether or not the plaintiffs in the toe-tapping lawyer case can unilaterally cancel a Court-ordered hearing.

Can this get any better?

(I'm thinking YES IT CAN)

Here's a highlight:
Plaintiffs are completely disingenuous when they claim they will not waive any matter that is properly before the jury ... they already have!

Unfortunately, plaintiffs wish to "kill an ant with an elephant". The real issue is the scope of the hearing. Filings of proposed testimony to be offered by defendant (which may or may not be allowed at the hearing) do not change the scope of the hearing. It will be governed by the Joint Motion of the parties (D.E. 698) and subsequent Order of the Court (D.E. 706). In large part, plaintiffs are correct -the hearing is to resolve question(s) surrounding the documentation supporting claims. Defendant will not be permitted to take a position at this hearing that it has not taken prior to the filing of the Joint Motion. However, the task of determining whether the items at issue are covered under the policy clearly is an issue at this hearing. Undoubtably, plaintiffs have understood this all along. See, e.g, D.E. 964.
Ok, sounds like the Court has already determined the issue -- so why is there a half-hour hearing on the hearing again?

In other news, you need to be at the right place at the right time, oy with this Carl Paladino, and salt turns out to be good for you.

Have a great weekend!

6 comments:

  1. Awesome....ORDER!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bondi v. Gelber, who is the better candidate?

    Pam Bondi is the far inferior candidate in this most important office in our state government.

    In Florida, the attorney general does not answer to the governor, a Senator nor a Congressman, when deciding which cases to pursue and which policies to enforce.

    The attorney general is the chief law enforcement officer. There is no higher official of the law to protect our rights, advocate our issues and defend our freedoms.

    To this aim, experience and careful judgment would seem to be most important. As you know, retaining the wrong lawyer can have life-long ramifications. Essentially, what we are doing in this race is retaining a lawyer to advocate for our collective interest.

    Pam Bondi has no statewide official experience. She has never held a political office; not a school board, not a community counsel, not one single office. Moreover, while we were participating in the democratic process and voting for those candidaites we felt were in the best interest of the Florida, Pam Bondi failed to vote in two of the last three elections. So though Pam Bondi poo poos her opponent as a politician for having been in elected positions for the past ten years, she should also poo poo voters for having voted for those horrible politicians in the past elections. Not voting is to allow your voice to be silent, to abdicate your responsibility to be informed and to care about our collective futures.

    Notwithstanding her lack of experience, when she has had the opportunity to express her judgment, twice-divorced Pam Bondi ended up as a defendant in a civil case where she was accused of not returning a New Orlean family's dog after the tragedy of Katrina. Granted, anyone can have a failed marriage. But if I told my mother that I was getting divorced for the second time, I know my mother would be somewhat more critical of my judgment the second time around. Through small, personal failures, one can gleam some insite into the mind of a person. Bondi's failures should indicate something rather than nothing.

    Secondly, Bondi's willingness to force an out-of-state family to hire an attorney, incur all the expenses to file a civil lawsuit, and only agree to return the family pet at the brink of a trial, shows me that Bondi does not by herself do the right thing or even know what the right thing to do is. Bondi was forced to return the dog to the family because a trial was about to begin. She had no defenses and the threat of a judgment forced her act as others would seem to act instinctively. This, too, my mother would frown upon.

    Pam Bondi is not the candidate we should be voting for. Pam Bondi won the Republican primary because she was endorsed by Sarah Palin. (BTW, Sarah Palin also endorsed Christine O'Donnel in Delaware and we are still awaiting her to post her favorite Supremem Court case on her website, as she was unable to name one in the only debate she has participated in).

    Florida is not Delaware, we are in dire need of a non-partisan, enlightened, attorney general. Pam Bondi will not represent all of us, she should not be seem as a credible candidate.

    Vote for Dan Gelber, go to his website, www.dangelber.com, investigate for yourself what he stands for, why he has been endorsed by nine(9) of ten(10) major Florida newspapers.

    Florida needs your vote, Florida needs our careful analysis, Florida needs Dan Gelber as attorney general.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bondi v. Gelber, who is the better candidate?

    Pam Bondi is the far inferior candidate in this most important office in our state government.

    In Florida, the attorney general does not answer to the governor, a Senator nor a Congressman, when deciding which cases to pursue and which policies to enforce.

    The attorney general is the chief law enforcement officer. There is no higher official of the law to protect our rights, advocate our issues and defend our freedoms.

    To this aim, experience and careful judgment would seem to be most important. As you know, retaining the wrong lawyer can have life-long ramifications. Essentially, what we are doing in this race is retaining a lawyer to advocate for our collective interest.

    Pam Bondi has no statewide official experience. She has never held a political office; not a school board, not a community counsel, not one single office. Moreover, while we were participating in the democratic process and voting for those candidaites we felt were in the best interest of the Florida, Pam Bondi failed to vote in two of the last three elections. So though Pam Bondi poo poos her opponent as a politician for having been in elected positions for the past ten years, she should also poo poo voters for having voted for those horrible politicians in the past elections. Not voting is to allow your voice to be silent, to abdicate your responsibility to be informed and to care about our collective futures.

    Notwithstanding her lack of experience, when she has had the opportunity to express her judgment, twice-divorced Pam Bondi ended up as a defendant in a civil case where she was accused of not returning a New Orlean family's dog after the tragedy of Katrina. Granted, anyone can have a failed marriage. But if I told my mother that I was getting divorced for the second time, I know my mother would be somewhat more critical of my judgment the second time around. Through small, personal failures, one can gleam some insite into the mind of a person. Bondi's failures should indicate something rather than nothing.

    Secondly, Bondi's willingness to force an out-of-state family to hire an attorney, incur all the expenses to file a civil lawsuit, and only agree to return the family pet at the brink of a trial, shows me that Bondi does not by herself do the right thing or even know what the right thing to do is. Bondi was forced to return the dog to the family because a trial was about to begin. She had no defenses and the threat of a judgment forced her act as others would seem to act instinctively. This, too, my mother would frown upon.

    Pam Bondi is not the candidate we should be voting for. Pam Bondi won the Republican primary because she was endorsed by Sarah Palin. (BTW, Sarah Palin also endorsed Christine O'Donnel in Delaware and we are still awaiting her to post her favorite Supremem Court case on her website, as she was unable to name one in the only debate she has participated in).

    Florida is not Delaware, we are in dire need of a non-partisan, enlightened, attorney general. Pam Bondi will not represent all of us, she should not be seem as a credible candidate.

    Vote for Dan Gelber, go to his website, www.dangelber.com, investigate for yourself what he stands for, why he has been endorsed by nine(9) of ten(10) major Florida newspapers.

    Florida needs your vote, Florida needs our careful analysis, Florida needs Dan Gelber as attorney general.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Wow! "Twice divorced." Got me thinking. When is the last time a candidate's divorce was an issue in a campaign? It was the 1964 Republican primary. Nelson Rockefeller left his first wife and married his second, the happy Happy. But she was not Happy for long. The 70+ Rocky dropped dead in 1979 whilst making love to a 20 something assistant. Or, as the police report said, he succumbed to a heart attack while working on an art book. And while we are on the subject, if being twice divorced is a liability, what about girlfriends and boyfriends. Shouldn't that count for something?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Excellent comment STL.

    I agree on the "twice-divorced" thing.

    The only possible relevance would be in connection with a Defense of Marriage/hypocrisy angle, ala Newt Gingrich, but I'm not aware of Bondi having the same horrific baggage on that issue.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Why are the deposition transcripts in Bondi's second divorce sealed? What do you suppose she said? Hmmmmm.....

    ReplyDelete