Skip to main content

You're Not Really Confused, Are You?





I'm pretty sure everyone agrees that Judge Rosenbaum will make a terrific 11th Circuit judge -- she's smart, hard-working, and demonstrates excellent judgment, discretion, and yes -- wisdom.

In this order I just love how she calls out defendants' counsel for pretending to be confused by fairly straightforward alleged ADA violations at a Mexican restaurant:
Second, Defendants’ claims that they are not capable of ascertaining from the Complaint the violations that Griffin alleges do not seem genuine. For example, Defendants complain that they cannot understand how paragraph 12.a of the Complaint, which cites Standards 208 and 502, relates to The Whole Enchilada because Section 208.2.1 “relates to hospital outpatient facilities and the defendants operate a restaurant[,]” and Section 208.2.3 “relates to residential facility Parking Spaces and the defendants operate a restaurant.” ECF No. 4-1 at ¶ 2. Thus, Defendants assert, they “do not know how [to] fix or respond to Section 208 since it cannot be determined which section applies.” Id. In support of their argument, Defendants attach certain pages of the ADA regulations, including Standards 208.2.1 and 208.2.3. See ECF No. 4-2.

But, although Section 208.2.1 clearly does not begin Section 208 and appears on page 34 of the excerpt that Defendants submit in support of their filing, Defendants conveniently do not attach page 33 of the same document, which includes the parts of Section 208 that precede Sections 208.2.1 and 208.2.3. See ECF No. 4-2 at 10-11.2 Significantly, Section 208.1 provides, “GENERAL. Where parking spaces are provided, parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with 208.” Section 208.2, in turn, notes the number of accessible parking spaces required for all establishments not specifically identified elsewhere in Section 208. Put simply, Sections 208.1 and 208.2 apply to parking requirements at all facilities that must be ADA-compliant, unless another provision within Section 208 sets forth a parking requirement specific to a particular facility. Defendants point to parts of Section 208 that they have picked and chosen and that they know do not apply to them and use those aspects of the Standards to argue that Section 208 as a whole does not apply to them when they know full well that the general parts of Section 208 do appear to apply to them. Worse yet, they appear to attempt to hide the relevant parts of Section 208 by attaching only the irrelevant parts of the Standard to their Motion. This does not comply with the duty of candor to the Court, and it is frivolous at best and disingenuous at worst.
Ouch.

Comments

  1. How does jay weaver still have a job?

    Despite his "news" "articles" robainas innocent of all charges.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Rosenbaum is the bomb. She will be missed in the district.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Agreed that she'll make a great appellate judge. But on the Eleventh she'll need to update some of that case law. What's up with all the citations in the motion-to-dismiss standard to pre-Twiqbal and unpublished Eleventh Circuit decisions?

    ReplyDelete
  4. need state court judges with her degreee of integrity, honesty and courage.

    state bench is in sad state.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Where is everyone going for cinco de shumie?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Where the hell is the Rule 11 sanction?

    ReplyDelete
  7. I am not at all confused. At least not since I was 17. And I do know who the daddy is. I have even numbered days, the husband gets the odd.

    ReplyDelete
  8. A defense firm filing a frivolous motion to dismiss? Next i'll find out that it gets dark at night time.

    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.