Wednesday, March 2, 2011

Can Someone Explain This?



Judge Valerie Manno Schurr appointed Mark Meland as a receiver for a company after finding it in "default" for failing to turn over financial records to South Florida power broker Chris Korge, who is represented by Kendall Coffey.

Huh?

Was the "default" a discovery sanction?  Did the Judge strike the defendant's pleadings?  Is that what the "default" means?

How do you get from a discovery sanction to the appointment of a receiver?

Even if the obligation to turn over records was contractual, as opposed to arising from the defendant's discovery obligations, I'm not following how a finding of "default" leads to the appointment of a receiver to run the business.

Maybe Bob Zarco, who represents the defendant, can explain this one, because something seems off about this story.

8 comments:

  1. when should a receiver be appointed?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Typical state court bullshit.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Seems like she struck his answer/defenses and defaulted him and damages are only issue left. The article says "Following her default order, the judge must still determine money damages in Korge’s suit against Osorio; his wife Amarilis, a company director; Craig Toll, the chief financial officer; and InnoVida."

    ReplyDelete
  4. 8:14, it's a provisional remedy and perfectly appropriate in certain circumstances -- I just don't see a good explanation of those circumstances here.

    8:33, I agree but that's tall order -- didn't the 3d just reverse one of these recently?

    ReplyDelete
  5. More importantly, what did Joan Rivers have to say about that shirt Bob Zarco is wearing!?!

    ReplyDelete
  6. SFL-- I don't read the Wednesday opinions anymore since you analyze them for me so if they reversed recently I would turn to you to tell me.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The judge should be voted out of office at her next election. A discovery sanction is supposed to use the least possible means to cure a problem. E.g., a daily fine, payment of costs, and other LIMITED forms of contempt penalties. Elaborate protection from judicial excess is supposed to assure a party is not deprived of his/her rights to due process, including the right to present witnesses, evidence, and have a jury decide. Even sanctions are subject to due process. Look how easy it was to deny a party all of this simply by pronouncing "discovery sanction"! Reminds me of Qaddafi's Libya.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Oh my god, there's a lot of worthwhile info here!

    ReplyDelete