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
Disney and the State of Florida appear to have buried their respective hatchets. As we noted in a post a few months ago, Florida prevailed over Disney in a federal lawsuit arising out of the Northern District of Florida that had accused the State of retaliating against Disney for speaking out against Gov. DeSantis and certain legislation passed by the State. Disney has pressed pause on its appeal of that ruling. And now, in a settlement announced yesterday, Disney and Florida have resolved state court litigation between the parties. The Herald covers it here.
The media is characterizing the settlement as victory for the State. At the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District Board Meeting, Miami-based attorney Paul Huck outlined the settlement details for the board. The YouTube clip summarizing the settlement begins at 39:30. But, big picture, the restrictive covenants that the old Reedy Creek Improvement District Board passed at the eleventh hour to saddle the new Governor-appointed board are now null and void.
Sounds like a normalizing of relations. Here's a quote from Vice Chair of the Central Tourism Oversight Board, Charbel Barakat: “With this settlement, which is complete and significant, we are eager to work with Disney.”
Well, the court is soliciting applicants for the two open spots. A bulk email went out this morning:
The Judicial Conference of the United States has
authorized the appointment of two full-time United States Magistrate Judges for
the Southern District of Florida at Miami, Florida.These appointments will succeed incumbents
who were confirmed as United States District Judges.The term of office is eight years.
Interested persons may contact the Clerk of the District
Court for additional information and application form.The application form is also available on the
Court's websitehttps://www.flsd.uscourts.gov/.Applications must be submitted only by
applicants personally to; FLSD_magistratejudgerecruitment@flsd.uscourts.gov
no later than 11:59 p.m. on Sunday, March 31, 2024.
For many years, the culture in this District was that magistrate judges had little chance at becoming a district judge. But that has changed. Two of last three judges came from the magistrate bench. It will be interesting to see if that continues.
Federal agents raided the Miami area home of rap mogul Sean Combs, better known as Diddy, reports say. Diddy owns a residence at 1 Star Island, which was previously owned by Gloria and Emilio Estefan and Diddy purchased for $35 million in 2021. The raid came weeks after a lawsuit alleged that Diddy was the leader of a criminal enterprise that could qualify as a “widespread and dangerous criminal sex trafficking organization.”
That's the title of Justice Breyer's new book, and he's making the rounds promoting it. This morning he was on Meet The Press. Here's the NBC report:
Former Justice Stephen Breyer described the 2022 leak of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade as “unfortunate” and sidestepped questions about whether justices had been working on a compromise ruling behind the scenes.
In
an interview with NBC News' "Meet the Press," Breyer didn't say he was
upset about the leak while noting that in general he tried to "avoid
getting angry" when he was on the bench.
"You
try to avoid getting angry or that — you try in the job — you try to
remain as calm, reasonable and serious as possible. I think it was
unfortunate," he said of the publication of the draft decision in the
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case.
Asked
directly whether the justices had discussed a potential compromise to
limit access to abortion at 15 weeks, Breyer told "Meet the Press"
moderator Kristen Welker, "Well, you know as much about that as I do."
“The normal situation is before something is written in the
conference, people in some form or other will discuss what they’re
thinking of writing, not always and not identical. But there’s usually
some discussion,” Breyer said of the process leading up to court
decisions.
Can’t
Touch This: SCOTUS Unanimously Decides That Inconsistent Acquittals Bar Retrial.
First, thank you to David Oscar
Markus and John R. Bryne for allowing me to submit this guest post. This post
will cover the Supreme Court’s recent opinion in McElrath v. Georgia, the Court’s latest decision regarding the Double Jeopardy
Clause and inconsistent verdicts. This issue was the subject of the 2024
Gibbons National Criminal Procedure Moot Court Competition, where my partner
Kaitlin Prece and I represented the University of Miami School of Law. I would
also like to thank our dedicated coaches, Adam Stolz and Luis Reyes, for their
guidance and support throughout the competition.
UPDATE -- David Lat's original post has a number of updates and he has written "an epic" follow-up post about Cannon and her clerks here.
The legal community is abuzz with this David Lat report that two of Judge Cannon's law clerks have resigned:
Judge Cannon has had at least two law clerks quit on her, according to
multiple sources—including individuals who serve in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of Florida, where she sits.
***
What does Judge Cannon have to say about clerks quitting on her? Over
the past few days, I have sent multiple emails to the Public
Information Office for the Southern District of Florida and to Judge
Cannon’s chambers, requesting comment on reports that at least two of
her clerks have departed before the scheduled end of their clerkships. I
have received read receipts, but no responses (even though, in my
experience, subjects are eager to warn me off bad information—for which
I’m always grateful). If I do hear back, I will immediately update this
post, of course.
I should be clear about what I don’t
know. My sources have been circumspect so far, and despite my best
efforts, I have been unable to determine precisely why these clerks
quit, when they departed, and if they have already been replaced or the
Cannon chambers is operating short-staffed.3
But
based on my experience, I believe that once the fact of the clerks’
quitting becomes public, the floodgates will open. Details about the
Cannon clerk departures will become more widely known, whether reported
by me or others. Additional information about other personnel issues in
her chambers—possibly involving employees other than clerks, such as
judicial assistants or courtroom deputies—could emerge. So one reason
I’ve decided to publish this post, despite lacking certain key details,
is to prime the pump—to encourage sources to come forward with more
information, and to encourage other journalists to follow up on my
reporting.
Detra Shaw-Wilder has been an attorney in private practice at Kozyak Tropin & Throckmorton in Coral Gables, Florida since 1994, rising from associate to partner. From 2015 to 2017, Ms. Shaw-Wilder was managing partner of the firm and has served as general counsel for the firm since 2017. She received her J.D. from the University of Miami School of Law in 1994 and her B.S. from the University of Florida in 1990.
You may remember the case of Irfan Khan. He was indicted back in 2011 to a lot of publicity about terrorism charges (mostly as a result of numerous press conferences that the U.S. Attorney's office held). His lawyers, the great Michael Caruso and wonderful Sowmya Bharathi, repeatedly said he was innocent. And yet he was detained because the prosecutors beat the terrorism drum.
Turns out, his lawyers were right -- Khan was innocent. Before trial, the government dropped all charges.
Khan sued, saying there was no probable cause and that the prosecution was malicious. He's been fighting for many many years, and the case was recently tried to the bench before Chief Judge Altonaga. She ruled for Khan, that it was malicious prosecution.
Good for him. And good for our Chief Judge, who isn't afraid to do the right thing.
Today, MLFA received an historic court
ruling in the case of Khan v. United States as to government liability
for malicious prosecution of an American Muslim. Irfan Khan was
arrested and indicted for Material Support of Terrorism in May of 2011.
He spent more than 317 days in solitary confinement while his wife and
children were sleeping on floors as they were forced out of their
apartment due to the false allegations of terrorism against Mr. Khan.
After almost 11 months in custody, the government released Mr. Khan and
dropped the charges – with no explanation or apology.
In
2015, MLFA partnered with Morgan & Morgan, the largest plaintiff’s
law firm in the country, which had brought a civil action against the
United States on Mr. Khan’s behalf to hold the government accountable
for their actions against Mr. Khan. After a twelve-year fight over
classified discovery and continuous obstruction by the government, in
February of 2024, this case finally went to trial before Chief Judge
Altonaga in Miami, Florida (1:13-cv-24366-CMA, FLSD). Over a four-week
trial, MLFA supported and participated with Morgan & Morgan’s trial
lawyers to demonstrate the government’s liability. Today, in an
historic court ruling, Chief Judge Altonaga found that the government
lacked probable cause in all stages of the prosecution of Mr. Khan, and
that the actions of the F.B.I. agents constituted legal malice. This is
the first time in more than 20 years since 9/11 that the government has
been held civilly liable for their actions in prosecuting American
Muslims. A hearing to determine the amount of financial damages awarded
to Mr. Khan will be set for late summer, 2024.
And this wouldn't be a Khan post, if I couldn't post this all-time great clip: