Sorry about the slow blogging this week. It's summer and I'm swamped... What up with that?
Okay, to the news:
1. General Noriega has filed a cert petition.
2. Paris Hilton starts trial tomorrow in front of Judge Moreno. Steven Binhak and Michael Weinstein represent her.
3. UBS trial next week.
4. Federal JNC interviews for judge and U.S. atty coming up.
5. Palm Beach is moving firearms cases to federal court. (The State Attorney there says it's because the min-mans in federal court are higher than in state court. But there is no min-man for being a felon in possession of a firearm in the federal system.)
6. More on SexyLexus and White & Case.
7. There's lots of mortgage fraud.
8. Boeis tops Wells.
9. AUSA Scott Ray is leaving the office. Going away party next Thurday at Tobacco Road. Good luck to Scott.
10. The Marshals are busy.
The SDFLA Blog is dedicated to providing news and notes regarding federal practice in the Southern District of Florida. The New Times calls the blog "the definitive source on South Florida's federal court system." All tips on court happenings are welcome and will remain anonymous. Please email David Markus at dmarkus@markuslaw.com
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
Monday, July 06, 2009
Obama nominates Beverly Martin to Eleventh Circuit
President Obama has nominated District Judge Beverly Martin to fill Lanier Anderson's seat on the Eleventh Circuit. She's been a district judge in the Northern District of Georgia since 2000 and before that was the U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Georgia for three years. She has sat by designation a couple of times on the Eleventh Circuit, the most noted case being Buckley v. Haddock, the taser case in which she dissented. (She wanted the video appended to the opinion, but the Court refused. After that, someone uploaded it to YouTube). She has a sense of humor -- check out this footnote (via Law.com): "Essentially, in the spirit of an old Woody Allen joke, Southern requests more time to finish a deposition that it apparently believes has not been very helpful." Then, invoking the joke from the 1977 movie "Annie Hall," she goes on, "Two elderly women are at a Catskill mountain resort, and one of 'em says, 'Boy, the food at this place is really terrible.' The other one says, 'Yeah, I know; and such small portions.'" A Macon native, Martin graduated from Stetson University and the University of Georgia School of Law. Saturday, July 04, 2009
SDFLA turns 4
Four years ago on Fourth of July weekend I started this blog with no expectations and no idea if the blog would last a month, let alone four years. Since then, there have been 1,275 posts (there is a post almost every business day) and almost 500,000 hits (it took us a while, but the blog now averages around 600 hits a day). Here is our first month of posts, and our first one -- suggesting that former President Bush appoint a Floridian to the Supreme Court. I just wanted to wish everyone a Happy Fourth of July and thank you all for stopping by over the past four years. I hope I can keep it going for another four. --David Markus
Friday, July 03, 2009
Sealed Mutual Benefits stuff starts to leak
Jay Weaver has the lengthy front page story here. Our prior coverage is here. The bombshell from the article is that Paul Huck Jr. was one of the reasons a number of documents were sealed and a number of judges recused (including Judge Huck). Of course Huck Jr. has been cleared of all wrongdoing -- he is a stand-up and ethical lawyer. But for him to have to go through this is terrible. From the intro to the Herald article:
The U.S. Justice Department is investigating corruption allegations made by an indicted Fort Lauderdale insurance executive who, in a bid for a favorable plea deal, has named lawyers, lobbyists and fundraisers he claims plotted with him to thwart a state crackdown on him and his industry.
Justice officials have convened a federal grand jury to pursue the claims of former Mutual Benefits Corp. chief Joel Steinger. The wealthy businessman contends that he orchestrated a campaign to stifle a 1999-2000 statewide grand jury probe by attempting to improperly influence public officials, three knowledgeable sources have told The Miami Herald.
One of the officials Steinger named was lawyer Paul Huck Jr., a former deputy to state Attorney General Charlie Crist. But Huck confirmed that he was one of six public officials already cleared of any wrongdoing by the Justice Department's Public Integrity Section. Huck said authorities have told him that he was "a reputational victim of statements made by a third party.''
Others who remain under scrutiny: several prosecutors and officials who worked under Florida Attorney General Bob Butterworth and his successor, Crist.
Judge Jordan had this to say:
''Disclosure of those names, and the matters being investigated, could have devastating consequences for those persons who have been cleared of any misconduct, as well as for those still under investigation,'' Jordan wrote, adding that the grand jury probe was ancillary to the Mutual Benefits fraud investigation.
Jordan stressed that, according to the Public Integrity Section, the six exonerated officials "had no knowledge of, or participation in, any of the alleged wrongdoing.''
More on Huck Jr. and his comment about having to go through such an ordeal:
Among them: Huck Jr., who was a deputy attorney general in Fort Lauderdale when Mutual Benefits was being prosecuted in Broward by the statewide prosecutor. The post is part of the attorney general's office. Mutual Benefits pleaded guilty to racketeering charges in 2007. Huck was not the prosecutor on that case.
Huck, who later became Gov. Crist's general counsel and now is in private practice in Miami, confirmed that he is one of the public officials the judge referred to as being cleared. Huck declined to comment further, saying he does not want to interfere with the probe.
''It's a real shame when folks in public service have to deal with that, and it makes it that much harder to attract people to go into public service in the first place,'' Huck told The Miami Herald.
The U.S. Justice Department is investigating corruption allegations made by an indicted Fort Lauderdale insurance executive who, in a bid for a favorable plea deal, has named lawyers, lobbyists and fundraisers he claims plotted with him to thwart a state crackdown on him and his industry.
Justice officials have convened a federal grand jury to pursue the claims of former Mutual Benefits Corp. chief Joel Steinger. The wealthy businessman contends that he orchestrated a campaign to stifle a 1999-2000 statewide grand jury probe by attempting to improperly influence public officials, three knowledgeable sources have told The Miami Herald.
One of the officials Steinger named was lawyer Paul Huck Jr., a former deputy to state Attorney General Charlie Crist. But Huck confirmed that he was one of six public officials already cleared of any wrongdoing by the Justice Department's Public Integrity Section. Huck said authorities have told him that he was "a reputational victim of statements made by a third party.''
Others who remain under scrutiny: several prosecutors and officials who worked under Florida Attorney General Bob Butterworth and his successor, Crist.
Judge Jordan had this to say:
''Disclosure of those names, and the matters being investigated, could have devastating consequences for those persons who have been cleared of any misconduct, as well as for those still under investigation,'' Jordan wrote, adding that the grand jury probe was ancillary to the Mutual Benefits fraud investigation.
Jordan stressed that, according to the Public Integrity Section, the six exonerated officials "had no knowledge of, or participation in, any of the alleged wrongdoing.''
More on Huck Jr. and his comment about having to go through such an ordeal:
Among them: Huck Jr., who was a deputy attorney general in Fort Lauderdale when Mutual Benefits was being prosecuted in Broward by the statewide prosecutor. The post is part of the attorney general's office. Mutual Benefits pleaded guilty to racketeering charges in 2007. Huck was not the prosecutor on that case.
Huck, who later became Gov. Crist's general counsel and now is in private practice in Miami, confirmed that he is one of the public officials the judge referred to as being cleared. Huck declined to comment further, saying he does not want to interfere with the probe.
''It's a real shame when folks in public service have to deal with that, and it makes it that much harder to attract people to go into public service in the first place,'' Huck told The Miami Herald.
Thursday, July 02, 2009
Alex Kozinski and Porn
We've posted about the whole dust-up with Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski and his personal website featuring sexually explicit photos and videos.
Well, the Third Circuit's judicial council, tasked with investigating the case, wrote a 41 page opinion admonishing Kozinski, but clearing him of any wrongdoing. It's just about the holiday weekend, so I haven't slogged through the whole opinion yet. But here's the bottom line:
We find that the Judge's possession of sexually explicit offensive material combined with his carelessness in failing to safeguard his sphere of privacy was judicially imprudent. Moreover, once the Judge became aware in 2007 that offensive material could be accessed by members of the public, his inattention to the need for prompt corrective action amounted to a disregard of a serious risk of public embarrassment. We join with the Special Committee in admonishing the Judge that his conduct exhibiting poor judgment with respect to this material created a public controversy that can reasonably be seen as having resulted in embarrassment to the institution of the federal judiciary. We determine that the Judge's acknowledgment of responsibility together with other corrective action, his apology, and our admonishment, combined with the public dissemination of this opinion, properly conclude this proceeding.
***
The Judge explained and admitted his error; apologized for it, recognizing its impact on the judiciary; and committed to changing his conduct to avoid any recurrence of the error. The offending material has been removed and will be destroyed. The Judge’s acknowledgment of responsibility combined with the corrective actions he has already completed or has committed to pursue and his apology, along with our admonishment, made public in this opinion, properly “remed[y] the problems raised by the complaint.” Rule 11(d)(2). Accordingly, this proceeding is properly concluded. We find that “all of the purposes of the judicial misconduct provisions are fully served” by this result.
In my opinion, this has been a huge waste of time. Kozinski issued the following statement to the WSJ Law Blog:
I asked the Third Circuit Court of Appeals to thoroughly review this matter, and I am pleased that today’s unanimous decision reaffirms what I have said all along about my private files: They were kept on a private server and were not intended to be shared publicly. Our Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has much important work to do, and I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to accomplish our goals.
Anyway, I hope you all have a wonderful Fourth.
Well, the Third Circuit's judicial council, tasked with investigating the case, wrote a 41 page opinion admonishing Kozinski, but clearing him of any wrongdoing. It's just about the holiday weekend, so I haven't slogged through the whole opinion yet. But here's the bottom line:
We find that the Judge's possession of sexually explicit offensive material combined with his carelessness in failing to safeguard his sphere of privacy was judicially imprudent. Moreover, once the Judge became aware in 2007 that offensive material could be accessed by members of the public, his inattention to the need for prompt corrective action amounted to a disregard of a serious risk of public embarrassment. We join with the Special Committee in admonishing the Judge that his conduct exhibiting poor judgment with respect to this material created a public controversy that can reasonably be seen as having resulted in embarrassment to the institution of the federal judiciary. We determine that the Judge's acknowledgment of responsibility together with other corrective action, his apology, and our admonishment, combined with the public dissemination of this opinion, properly conclude this proceeding.
***
The Judge explained and admitted his error; apologized for it, recognizing its impact on the judiciary; and committed to changing his conduct to avoid any recurrence of the error. The offending material has been removed and will be destroyed. The Judge’s acknowledgment of responsibility combined with the corrective actions he has already completed or has committed to pursue and his apology, along with our admonishment, made public in this opinion, properly “remed[y] the problems raised by the complaint.” Rule 11(d)(2). Accordingly, this proceeding is properly concluded. We find that “all of the purposes of the judicial misconduct provisions are fully served” by this result.
In my opinion, this has been a huge waste of time. Kozinski issued the following statement to the WSJ Law Blog:
I asked the Third Circuit Court of Appeals to thoroughly review this matter, and I am pleased that today’s unanimous decision reaffirms what I have said all along about my private files: They were kept on a private server and were not intended to be shared publicly. Our Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has much important work to do, and I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to accomplish our goals.
Anyway, I hope you all have a wonderful Fourth.
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
Interviews (and times) made public
After the list has been floating around the past couple of days, the JNC finally posted it here. You can see the times of the public interviews. I wonder if anyone will show up.
Some interesting notes:
Some interesting notes:
- The order of the interviews is random. (Which is the best slot? Robin Rosenbaum is first up and Ana Martinez is last. Robert Lee is first up after a short 30 minute lunch. For USA, Mark Schnapp is first up and James Swaim is last.)
- The interviews last 25 minutes.
- Each applicant gets an opening (3 minutes) and closing statement (2 minutes). (Those should be interesting...)
- The JNC recommends that applicants show up 30 minutes ahead of time. (Can you imagine an applicant being late?)
- "The Rule" has been invoked. "No applicant will be allowed to attend the interview of another applicant or to discuss an interview with a member of the public who has attended other interviews." (So can I live blog?)
- AUSA Marcus Christian got an interview for the U.S. Attorney slot in the Middle District of Florida. And B.J. Throne got one in the Northern District...
New UM Dean starts with a bang
Apparently, incoming 1Ls are being asked to defer a year because UM accepted too many students. Here's the incoming Dean's memo to the incoming 1Ls, courtesy of AboveTheLaw:
UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI LAW SCHOOL -- MEMO -- DEFERRAL OPTIONS
Every year our Admissions Office uses our past experience with acceptance rates to decide how many students to admit. In these economically troubled times past experience has turned out to be a poor guide. An unprecedented percentage of applicants admitted to the University of Miami Law School have accepted our offer. This will give us a larger than optimal first-year class.
Accordingly we are offering an incentive to defer admission until Fall 2010. If you wish to take advantage of this offer you must notify us by e-mail [Redacted] or facsimile [Redacted] by July 10, 2009.
While I would like to believe that this year's elevated acceptance rate reflects the great sense of excitement about the Law School and its future that led me to become its new Dean, I fear that some of it may be related to the shortage of jobs in the current economy. Perhaps many of you are looking to law school as a safe harbor in which you can wait out the current economic storm.
If this describes your motivation for going to law school I urge you to think hard about your plans and to consider deferring enrollment. Law school requires an enormous investment of work, energy, time, and money. It is very demanding intellectually and emotionally. Beyond this, in these uncertain and challenging times the nature of the legal profession is in great flux. It is very difficult to predict what the employment landscape for young lawyers will be in May 2012 and thereafter.
If you are choosing to join us this Fall because you are strongly committed to the study of law we welcome you with open arms and promise to do our best to provide you with an exceptional and challenging educational experience. But if you are approaching law school with ambivalence or the thought that it will be a safe haven, perhaps you should take a year to decide whether it is the best choice for you.
To encourage this we are offering incentives to admitted students to defer admission until Fall 2010. The basic idea is that we will give you a $5000 Public Interest Deferral Scholarship for the 2010-11 academic year if you defer starting law school until August 2010. There is one additional condition: performing and documenting 120 hours of public service by June 1, 2010.
This requirement reflects the commitment to public service we try to instill in all our students.
The following are the benefits of taking advantage of this unique offer and deferring your enrollment to Fall 2010:
* Guaranteed $5,000 Public Interest Deferral Scholarship when completing 120 hours of public service. This scholarship would be in addition to any other scholarship award you may receive (not to exceed the cost of tuition).
* Increase your likelihood of selection for a $75,000 Miami Scholars Scholarship award ($25,000 each year for 3 years). This is a scholarship designed to encourage and reward public service.
* If qualified, be among the first group considered for all 2010 scholarships (see offer details).
* Apply your entire $300 seat deposit to Fall 2010, rather than receiving only a partial refund and forfeiting the balance.
For further important details about this offer, click here.
If you would like to defer your admission to Fall 2010, please contact us by e-mail or facsimile
[Redacted] by July 10th. If you have questions, please contact the Office of Admissions [Redacted].
I am delighted that the University of Miami is your law school of choice. I am very excited about its future and hope to welcome you either this August or next.
Warm regards,
Trish White Dean Designate
UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI LAW SCHOOL -- MEMO -- DEFERRAL OPTIONS
Every year our Admissions Office uses our past experience with acceptance rates to decide how many students to admit. In these economically troubled times past experience has turned out to be a poor guide. An unprecedented percentage of applicants admitted to the University of Miami Law School have accepted our offer. This will give us a larger than optimal first-year class.
Accordingly we are offering an incentive to defer admission until Fall 2010. If you wish to take advantage of this offer you must notify us by e-mail [Redacted] or facsimile [Redacted] by July 10, 2009.
While I would like to believe that this year's elevated acceptance rate reflects the great sense of excitement about the Law School and its future that led me to become its new Dean, I fear that some of it may be related to the shortage of jobs in the current economy. Perhaps many of you are looking to law school as a safe harbor in which you can wait out the current economic storm.
If this describes your motivation for going to law school I urge you to think hard about your plans and to consider deferring enrollment. Law school requires an enormous investment of work, energy, time, and money. It is very demanding intellectually and emotionally. Beyond this, in these uncertain and challenging times the nature of the legal profession is in great flux. It is very difficult to predict what the employment landscape for young lawyers will be in May 2012 and thereafter.
If you are choosing to join us this Fall because you are strongly committed to the study of law we welcome you with open arms and promise to do our best to provide you with an exceptional and challenging educational experience. But if you are approaching law school with ambivalence or the thought that it will be a safe haven, perhaps you should take a year to decide whether it is the best choice for you.
To encourage this we are offering incentives to admitted students to defer admission until Fall 2010. The basic idea is that we will give you a $5000 Public Interest Deferral Scholarship for the 2010-11 academic year if you defer starting law school until August 2010. There is one additional condition: performing and documenting 120 hours of public service by June 1, 2010.
This requirement reflects the commitment to public service we try to instill in all our students.
The following are the benefits of taking advantage of this unique offer and deferring your enrollment to Fall 2010:
* Guaranteed $5,000 Public Interest Deferral Scholarship when completing 120 hours of public service. This scholarship would be in addition to any other scholarship award you may receive (not to exceed the cost of tuition).
* Increase your likelihood of selection for a $75,000 Miami Scholars Scholarship award ($25,000 each year for 3 years). This is a scholarship designed to encourage and reward public service.
* If qualified, be among the first group considered for all 2010 scholarships (see offer details).
* Apply your entire $300 seat deposit to Fall 2010, rather than receiving only a partial refund and forfeiting the balance.
For further important details about this offer, click here.
If you would like to defer your admission to Fall 2010, please contact us by e-mail or facsimile
[Redacted] by July 10th. If you have questions, please contact the Office of Admissions [Redacted].
I am delighted that the University of Miami is your law school of choice. I am very excited about its future and hope to welcome you either this August or next.
Warm regards,
Trish White Dean Designate
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)