Skip to main content

"In Miami, 20 Pages Means 20 Pages."



Long-time readers know we're process and procedure (and Local Rule) wonks, so this order from Chief Judge Moreno is like legal catnip:
ADJUDGED that Plaintiffs Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration is STRICKEN. Local Rule 7.1(c)(2) requires that responses to motions be no more than twenty (20) pages in length without prior Court approval. Plaintiff's Response brief exceeds this length without Court approval. Plaintiff, in a footnote, argues that ''although this memorandum reaches the 21st page, the initial caption and signature are not to be counted against the page limit." Simply stating that Plaintiff s brief complies with the local rules does not make it so; Local Rule 7.1(c)(2) provides Plaintiff with no cover for his error. The Court notes that, had Plaintiff exercised greater discretion over his liberal use of footnotes, the brief would likely have  satisfied the local rules.
Ok, so what have we learned?

1.  Ask for more pages in advance of your filing.

2.  Initial caption and signature blocks count against the page limit, whether you are in Monte Carlo, Beverly Hills, London, Paris, Rome, or Gstaad.

3.  Footnotes are annoying.

Comments

  1. Judge is wrong. Signature blocks can run several pages.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Silly order. If the court goes on to grant the motion to compel arbitration as unopposed, it is reversible error.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Petty order. And wrong. The local rule states: " ... signature pages ... shall not be counted as pages for purposes of this rule."

    ReplyDelete
  4. They should be able to refile nunc pro tunc edited

    ReplyDelete
  5. Personally I think the footnote did them in. I don't see any real harm, they should be able to refile the brief in a corrected form.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Title pages preceding the first page of text, signature pages, certificates of good faith conferences, and certificates of service shall not be counted as pages for purposes of this rule."

    I guess I'd have to see the response to see whether it complies with the rule.

    At any rate, it's struck, not stricken.

    Also, SFL, I'm not so sure that the Plaintiff can simply refile. It's not as though FAM struck it without prejudice to refile.

    ReplyDelete
  7. True, they'd have to seek leave and ask it be accepted out of time.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It's a petty order and shitty lawyering at the same time. A few days (or a week) before your response is due you ask opposing counsel for an extra few pages and file an unopposed motion.

    ReplyDelete
  9. feds. all form and no substance. wasted judicial resource (or your tax payer dollars hard at work).

    ReplyDelete
  10. @12:05 pm ....Fred is NEVER wrong....just ask him....

    ReplyDelete
  11. 7:57 too bad he ruled against you.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Footnotes > In-text citations
    All day and twice on Sunday.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

My Kind of Federal Judge!

Sure we have Scott Rothstein and his lovely Tom James clothier Romina Sifuentes, but Louisiana has ED LA judge G. Thomas Porteous Jr.:
A federal judge from Louisiana who had run up big gambling debts routinely solicited money and gifts from lawyers with cases before his court, Congressional investigators said Tuesday as the House opened impeachment hearings in the judge’s case. The judge, G. Thomas Porteous Jr. of Federal District Court, had more than $150,000 in credit card debt by 2000, mostly for cash advances spent in casinos, investigators said. Judge Porteous’s requests for cash became so frequent that one New Orleans lawyer said he started trying to dodge the judge.“He began to use excuses that he needed it for tuition, he needed it for living expenses,” the lawyer, Robert Creely, told a House Judiciary Committee task force. “I would avoid him until I couldn’t avoid him anymore.”
Mr. Creely said he and his law partner, Jacob Amato, gave Judge Porteous an estimated $20,000 o…

Honoring Richard C. Seavey

I drank a shit-ton of bourbon last night. Enough to float a battleship.

My head hurts. But not as much as my heart.

We lost another lawyer over the weekend. Not someone who will receive facebook accolades and other public claims of friendship and statements that he shaped and changed lives and careers. Just a guy who did the best he could with what he had. Every day. And he did very, very well to be the best person he could be. 
Richard Seavey was a profoundly private person. In his 49 years, he walked through more than his share of trials and tribulations, mostly asking for no help, leaning on no one. 

Richard was a fantastic lawyer. He could try a case. He could "litigate" a case. He could mediate and settle a case. He was nuanced. He bent but never broke. The blustery Miami lawyer never scared him. To the contrary, he found humor in it, studying it like a science project. Richard never got too high or too low. He was good at lawyering, but you got the f…

First Carnival Triumph Lawsuit on File!

It was filed in the SD FL (of course) and is pending before Judge Graham.

Check it out here.

The lawyer on the pleading is Marcus R. Spagnoletti.