Wednesday, August 31, 2011

3d DCA Watch -- Let's Party Like It's 2007!



Hi folks, sorry I'm late but it's hard to blog and take a deposition (though I'm getting better at it).

Onward to the bunker, where once again we get to learn life legal lessons courtesy of the most fabulous denizens of the most fabulous bunker in all the most fabulous of lands (hey, I may someday run for political office).

From the darkest recesses of the deepest crevices -- at a purely arbitrary date and time -- written utterances will erupt full force into the atmosphere, like Old Faithful, to the great delight and occasional dismay of the adoring schleppers who keep begging for more:

Jurasek v. Jurasek:

News travels slow in the divorce bar -- they're still getting used to Palm Pilots just as tech-savvy lawyers are dazzling clients with an obscure, little known device put out by a scrappy upstart and known only to the select few as "iPad" (did I spell that right)?

Anyways, they still think it's 2007 down there: 
We agree with the wife that the trial court erred and abused its discretion in awarding the husband a “special equity” in the parties’ jointly owned marital residence. The husband contends that he has greater entitlement to the parties’ jointly titled home based on his investment of his share of his inheritance fund in the marital home. This argument is insufficient as a matter of law. “Special equity” was abolished in 2008 and was replaced by the term, “a claim for unequal distribution” of marital property. See § 61.075 (11) Fla. Stat. (2008).
 Once again political correctness has killed a perfectly fine phrase!

Regions v. Mercenari:

Surprise -- Judge Adrien affirmed on appeal!

But not according to Judge Shepherd's serendipitous dissent:
The only connection this case has to Miami-Dade County is the serendipitous fact the plaintiffs live in Miami-Dade County. While the plaintiffs choice of venue is an important consideration, the trial court must balance this choice with the convenience of all the parties and witnesses.
But that's a pretty big serendipitous connection, no?

No:
All of the activity relating to this case occurred in Bay County, Florida. Both the purchase and termination agreements were signed there, and all the activity relating to the escrow agreements occurred there. All of the defendants’ witnesses are located in Bay County.
For good measure Judge Shepherd pulls out and bolds some language from Kinney.

Ouch.

But whatever happened to the vaulted and much-praised-while-holding-your-nose "abuse of discretion" standard?

6 comments:

  1. Every once in a blue moon Adrien would screw up and rule correctly.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have a great deposition story to tell you sometime offline. LOL.

    I can't imagine practicing divorce law. I mean, yes it's a necessary evil, but even if you do a wonderful job as their attorney, they're ending their marriage and surely still come away with a bitter taste in their mouth no matter what was achieved. Do you avoid those?

    We need to get you ,more into the employment law arena. LOL.

    ReplyDelete
  3. No thanks -- but I'd love to hear your story.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Goodness, there is a great deal of effective info above!

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don't know if it's just me or if perhaps everybody else experiencing issues with your blog.
    It seems like some of the written text in your content are running off the screen.
    Can somebody else please provide feedback and let me know if this is
    happening to them as well? This could be a problem with my
    browser because I've had this happen previously. Cheers

    Also visit my site :: how to get a gf

    ReplyDelete