Of course life must go on, so let's get right to the Bunker and.....aaah screw it, my heart's not in it today:
Bull Motors v. Brown:
Probably a good idea to hold an evidentiary hearing before granting injunctive relief.
Celebrity Cruises v. Fernandes:
Lawyers frequently lament about how trial judges should be tougher on discovery shenanigans and yet, when sanctions are imposed, they are often reversed on procedural grounds that, at this point, should be well-known to all litigants.
Here the trial judge struck pleadings as a discovery sanction, but apparently didn't provide adequate notice or conduct an evidentiary hearing:
While Celebrity argues a number errors mandating reversal, we need go no further than the total lack of notice to Celebrity that sanctions were going to be considered much less imposed and the lack of an opportunity to present evidence on this issue, to conclude reversal is required. First, “the granting of relief, which is not sought by the notice of hearing or which expands the scope of a hearing and decides matters not noticed for hearing, violates due process.” Connell, 932 So. 2d at 444 (citations omitted). In his March 7, 2013 motion, Fernandes neither moved for sanctions nor asked to have Celebrity’s pleadings stricken and the court below did not issue an order to show cause as to why sanctions should not be imposed.4 Thus, we agree with Celebrity that the court below had no authority to strike its pleadings on March 20 or to otherwise impose the sanction ordered.Big win for Rudy Sorondo.