This is a civil trial in which counsel has tested positive for COVID. Developing.
Swintelski v. American Medical Systems de 168 by David Oscar Markus on Scribd
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
didn't see this coming. thought it was all under control.
ReplyDeleteIt is curious that the motion discloses the vaccination status of only one person. If I was Judge Cannon, I'd like to know if there were people on the team that were unvaccinated, not wearing masks, and not socially distancing because it seems that only now is the defense team putting those protocols in place.
ReplyDelete11:37 do judges disclose their vaccination status? Oh wait, they were ordered to get shots...🙄
Delete11:37 you need to read a little closer but thanks for trying.
ReplyDeleteI'm old enough to remember Judge Ruiz having the first "post pandemic" trial and the cute photo
ReplyDeleteNot an emergency motion, candidly, but I'd give the lawyers a pass.
ReplyDelete...and they were back in trial today.
ReplyDeleteThere's no vaccine or mask mandate. This is what freedom looks like. If you don't like it I suggest you move to Sweden.
ReplyDeleteDear 1:44, 11:37 here. I read just fine, thank you. No representations were made about the trial team being vaccinated other than the one person who tested positive. With regards to the other measures, this is what the motion says on page 4: "The AMS trial team will continue to work together, *but* wearing masks, distancing, etc." The "but" implies they were not doing this before. In addition to the fact that the motion never indicates they were following any of these procedures before.
ReplyDelete@332 - Stupid. Just stupid. Compulsory vaccination has been ubiquitous in this country for over 100 years. The notion that adding a vaccine for this particular contagious disease is somehow un-American is pure ignorance.
ReplyDeleteThe number of flat earthers reading this blog must be through the roof.
And remind me, where in the Constitution can I find the freedom from mask wearing? I would imagine that it is near the freedom from neck tie wearing. I would like to look into this topic so that I can inform the next judge I see about my patriotic objection to wearing a tie to court.
5:23 it's called DUE PROCESS OF LAW. We all have rights under the Constitution and natural law to not to be deprived of LIBERTY.Forcing me to mask up or inject some experimental drug into my body deprives me of my LIBERTY.
ReplyDelete4:46 what do you make of this?
ReplyDeleteThe cite to the CDC on pp 4-5 about fully vaccinated people who have been exposed. Doesn't that imply that they are vaccinated?
And what about HIPPA!!!
@5:41 what about "HIPPA?"
ReplyDeleteFirst, it is HIPAA. "HIPPA" is not a thing.
Second, HIPAA only prevents healthcare providers, health plans, and covered entities (transcriptionists, coders, data clearinghouses) from sharing personally identifiable information without consent. None of that is implicated here.
The vax argument is fun, but we ‘now’ know that the jab doesnt prevent infection or spread by inoculated persons.
ReplyDeleteJust like the mask, it ‘may’ help but wont stop a virus from doing virusy things.
The need for a 3rd shot is merely the symptom of not enough exposure post vaccination.
Even my kid knows that HIPPA prevents anyone from asking you about your confidential medical info. Its all over twitter just look.
ReplyDelete927 is a great troll. LOL. Hats off. I'm convinced he's the "your welcome" guy. You should create an account or sign off with a catchy name like like "The Right Way." You'd be a local internet celebrity. Like an old WWF (WWE to the younger kids) villain, but for lawyer blogs.
ReplyDeleteFederal is a lot of typing. I could probably have fully explained the motion for mistrial in two pages, including a big footnote explaining the due process clause to 5:36.
ReplyDeleteI don't know what to believe honestly. I recently heard a well informed person talking about how the vaccine wipes out your DNA. That's scary stuff.
ReplyDeleteJudges were not "ordered" to get shots.They're the most protected in the courtroom anyway enclosed in their plexigass shelters.
ReplyDelete