3d DCA Watch -- Post Turkey Day Edition!

Welcome back!

I hope everyone watched football, got soused, gorged on roast beast, fought with their relatives, and then immediately headed to Wal-Mart where they got in a shooting match over a parking space.

Isn't that the true meaning of Thanksgiving?

Meanwhile the wheels of justice grind on, and we dutifully bring you this belated 3d DCA Watch featuring a case that, if the Court adopted the appellant's position, would "shake the foundation of the Rules of Appellate Procedure."

Castelo Dev. v. Rawls:

Note to counsel not a party who happens to be monitoring a hearing:  shut up.
From the record before us, it appears counsel for Mortgage Bankers first appeared below at a hearing on Castelo’s motion for reconsideration of the order vacating the foreclosure sale. At the outset of the hearing, counsel for Mortgage Bankers identified himself, but stated he was “not appearing as part of this litigation.” However, unable to contain himself, counsel took the bait from Castelo’s counsel, who, near the end of the hour-and-ten-minute-long hearing, asked the court to give Mortgage Bankers’ counsel “two minutes.” Counsel then jumped directly into the fray. We believe this act comprised an abandonment of any prior position he had articulated and constituted a general appearance by Mortgage Bankers.
Judge Shepherd's opinion brings to mind the old adage:  Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt.

And how was your extended weekend?


  1. John B. Thompson, J.D., M.A.
    5721 Riviera Drive
    Coral Gables, Florida 33146

    November 26, 2012

    The Honorable David F. Crow
    Circuit Court Judge
    15th Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County
    205 N. Dixie Hwy, Room 10D
    West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Via mail and email, dfcrow@co.palm-beach.fl.us

    Re: The Florida Bar's Cover-Up for and Protection of Attorney Laura Watson

    Dear Judge Crow:

    In April 2008, more than four years ago, you entered a remarkable and courageous final judgment in Stewart v. Kane, Case No. 502004CA006138XXXXMBAO, which you forwarded to The Florida Bar because of your finding that Florida Bar member Laura Watson, Florida Bar #476330, violated at least seven Bar Rules.

    A Florida Bar Grievance Committee has found probable cause against Watson. But guess what? The Bar's Director of Lawyer Regulation, Ken Marvin, has told the public that he has instructed Bar prosecutors not to proceed because Watson is about to be a judge! See this at the JAABLOG:
    Laura Watson's bar complaint is kaput. Yes, a finding of probable cause was made on October 22nd, found here, however that's as far as it's going to go. According to Ken Marvin, Director of Lawyer Regulation for the Florida Bar, no formal complaint will be drafted, because a prosecution cannot be concluded before Watson dons her robe. Come January, when Watson takes the oath, the Bar loses jurisdiction, well before the standard six months usually allowed for discovery and hearings in bar proceedings. If Watson ever becomes a lawyer again the Bar could then proceed with the complaint, but at this point in time Watson is free and clear.

    The next obvious question concerns JQC jurisdiction. Marvin didn't know the answer, and we don't know yet either. In the interim however, please enjoy David Crow's Final Judgment, the document that started all the fuss in the first place ...

    Posted by JAABLOG at 11/15/2012 4:24 PM | View Comments (50) | Add Comment

    This is utter nonsense by Marvin. The Bar still has jurisdiction over this lawyer, who is not yet a judge, and it will also have jurisdiction after she is a judge because what she allegedly did was done while she was practicing law.

    The American Bar Association formally found that the bar disciplinary structure of The Florida Bar is fatally flawed and politically corruptible. This is Watson/Marvin charade is the latest proof.

    Your Honor, I strongly urge you to initiate lawyer disciplinary proceedings in your circuit court, as you are authorized to do just that by Bar Rule 3-3.5.

    If you choose not to do that, then, respectfully I suggest, you should alert both the Florida Governor and the Florida Surpeme Court of the failure of the lawyer disciplinary process. Watson should be suspended from the practice of law pending the outcome of ethics proceedings against her. The Supreme Court can enter a suspension order in a New York minute. This would prove effectual, as the law in Florida is settled, so says the Florida Supreme Court, that a suspended lawyer cannot serve on the bench.

    I and others have massive evidence of the political, commercial corruption of The Florida Bar, so much so that an investigation of The Florida Bar by the United States Justice Department for the deprivation of "honest services" as to lawyer discipline is warranted. It can be shown that The Bar protects certain unethical lawyers because of their illicit commercial and political connections within The Bar and its Governors. The Bar, for example, protected Ponzi schemer Scott Rothstein for years because a) he had insinuated himself onto a Bar grievance committee, b) he was funding Bar IOTA trust accounts with Ponzi monies, and c) he was raising political contributions for a Bar President's sister.

  2. What if what Thompson says is true about the Florida Bar and Rothstein?

  3. Thank you for your sharing! I really like to read it, I had to make sure my bookmark your articles, will be back, in the foreseeable future. I want to encourage you to continue your great work, have a happy weekend! idateasia review


Post a Comment