Message to all attorneys in the other 49 states: Florida doesn't want you.
Reciprocity, the comity that states extend to members of the bar: "you let our lawyers in your Bar and we'll let your lawyers in our Bar" doesn't exist in Florida.
Florida has long believed that every lawyer in the union would want to retire here:
"Yeah, we bought a little place in Boca Raton and I'm going to hang out a shingle and do some closings from my house. The condo has a golf course and a clubhouse and canasta on Thursdays and Gladys's sister and her husband Hubert moved five years ago and they love it. We can't take these winters anymore."
Meanwhile, no lawyers in Florida are saying:
"Iris and I found a charming place in East Detroit. You can't believe how cheap houses are, and really we like the harsh winters. So we're going to retire and I'm going to pick up a few court appointments on the side."
So the Bar waded in to this dispute and sent out a panicky email assuring us that while they are processing our renewal fees, they are otherwise DOING NOTHING.
Yes, the Florida Bar, really really wants you to know that despite what you may heard around the water cooler (or the nespresso machine in our office which we absolutely love) the Bar is doing NOTHING about this. So don't worry, because if there is one thing the Florida Bar has shown us over the years is that they are absolutely experts at doing nothing.
Dear Colleagues:
As your Eleventh Circuit representatives to the Board of Governors, we write to echo the email message you received yesterday from the President of The Florida Bar and to likewise assure you that we recognize the responsibility of representing you and the more than 100,000 lawyers licensed in Florida. We have not nor will we ever advance a recommendation or an initiative contrary to the interest of the lawyers we represent and the public we serve.
We emphasize three points:
(Maybe you thought we were exaggerating): No Action Being Taken: To be clear, The Florida Bar and its Board of Governors have taken no action on the issue of admission by motion/reciprocity and have no current plans to do so without input from membership. In fact, the issue has only been one part of a broader analysis – Vision 2016 – studying the evolving practice of law in Florida and throughout the country.
Vision 2016 and the Future: Under Vision 2016, the goal to date has been simple: to identify challenges facing the legal profession, analyze issues and make recommendations as to how best move the practice forward and remain competitive in today’s fast-changing landscape. These topics range from bar admissions and technology to legal education and access to legal services.
An inclusive process: The Florida Bar’s rule-making process is intended to be collaborative and inclusive by design, with all Florida Bar members strongly encouraged to share their comments, feedback and concerns on any issue brought forward for discussion. These comments can be shared via email or by going directly to The Florida Bar’s dedicated Vison 2016 site at www.floridabar.org/vision2016. Together, we can positively chart a path forward for the organization and the profession.
As we move forward, we will continue to be staunch advocates for all of the lawyers we represent and the public we serve.
Thank you.
The Florida Bar, Eleventh Circuit Board of Governors
Steven Davis
Dori Foster Morales
John H. (Jack) Hickey
Michael Higer
Dennis Kainen
Leslie Lott
Roland Sanchez-Medina
When you see something that is not right, not fair, find a way to get in the way and cause trouble. Congressman John Lewis
JUSTICE BUILDING BLOG
WELCOME TO THE OFFICIAL RICHARD E GERSTEIN JUSTICE BUILDING BLOG. THIS BLOG IS DEDICATED TO JUSTICE BUILDING RUMOR, HUMOR, AND A DISCUSSION ABOUT AND BETWEEN THE JUDGES, LAWYERS AND THE DEDICATED SUPPORT STAFF, CLERKS, COURT REPORTERS, AND CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS WHO LABOR IN THE WORLD OF MIAMI'S CRIMINAL JUSTICE. POST YOUR COMMENTS, OR SEND RUMPOLE A PRIVATE EMAIL AT HOWARDROARK21@GMAIL.COM. Winner of the prestigious Cushing Left Anterior Descending Artery Award.
Wednesday, July 29, 2015
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
25 comments:
I once contemplated taking the Florida Bar because my sister, neice, and parents were in Jacksonville. However, as the fees were going to be in the neighborhood of $3000 because of the amount of time I've been in practice, I thought better of it. California will just have to continue to endure my presence.
Thank goodness that piece of shit scumbag John Connelley will rot in jail.
Rump, what exactly is it you want the fla bar to do for us. Some examples would be nice. Even better, what states bars are doing things you believe fla should be doing at the present rate we are charged ( which is pretty minimal )?
any comments about shocking display by 3dca in connolly en banc ruling yesterday?
weird fact about rothenberg's connolly opinion yesterday -- same day she authored an opinion affirming another murder conviction in which manny alvarez represented appellant. coincidence? or judicial stalking?
Anonymous at 7:00:
Sure, it's great the guy is in prison. But we're supposed to be lawyers here. Just being glad someone goes to jail is not supposed to be enough.
The prosecution's contorted theory about possessing a firearm during commission of the crime, and the Third's even more twisted endorsement of it is result-oriented jurisprudence at its worst.
In his dissent, Suarez wrote:
"Under the majority’s rationale, a defendant who is not present during the commission of a felony but who “carries, displays,” etc. a weapon or firearm (for example, a legally registered weapon worn or possessed by valid concealed weapons permit) unrelated to the felony itself, may be convicted as a principal and have his or her conviction reclassified based on that unrelated weapon. The policy implications of this holding are profound. "
He's right. The majority opinion is bad law and it's going to have bad results. Your client had a deer rifle on a rack in the room when he called to arrange to meet his drug connection? Too bad -- that's possession of a firearm during commission of a drug buy. You watch the prosecutors leverage this opinion.
Its Rottenberg.
Chef whipped up some gluten free stuffed with fried cow cheeks and a ragu of organic kobe beef.
Holly stuffed shells batman! I was there too. Late at night. Right?
Dude I think I saw you. With the hot blonde wearing the red leather one piece?
The 3 DCA is known for result-oriented jurisprudence that twists the law beyond all legal logic. Hopefully the Florida Supreme Court will put them in their place once again.
HAPPY BIRTHDAY Phil R.!
Has Leslie Rottenburg have any shame?
I read the en banc opinion from the 3rd DCA and shook my head.
How on earth can they twist those facts so far away from what really happened and affirm? Does Leslie have any shame?
"To all the lawyers freaking out over the news that Florida Bar President Ramon Abadin mentioned the idea of reciprocity in his induction speech, I have some advice: Calm the fuck down"
9:51
NO she has no shame
It seems to me, that as usual, Rick Suarez has it right. His dissent will be the reason the Florida Supreme Court will grant cert. Rothenberg and the remainder of the majority have to know they are going to be reversed. Rothenberg's motive has to be to keep Connolly in jail as long as she can before his inevitable release.
Suarez is the best kept secret on any DCA bench. He has been on the DCA for almost 15 years, and yet no one even mentions him for the thoughtful and intelligent judge he is. Reading Suarez is like reading the reasoning of a much younger Alan Schwartz (before his deterioration into vindictiveness). What we don't see is how he handles himself behind the scenes, and the respect he garners from his brothers and sisters at the 3rd. It is our gain that he remains on the 3rd as opposed to seeking some higher judicial office. It has taken too long for him to be the Chief Judge of that court.
As to the merits of the case, the instruction for Second Degree Murder, despite it being a mandatory lesser included, should never have been given. If the defense knew that the SOL applied to that charge, then the court could actually have discharged the defendant on all but First Degree Murder.
Like everyone else, I love Stan Blake. He is a fair and experienced judge. I can not think of a judge that I would rather my client's appear. But on this one, he dropped the ball. On this one, I think he got caught up in the sheer immensity of the case. Like so many judges, it is easier to take the direct route and let the DCA sort it out. This is one of those once in a lifetime cases that give a judge an opportunity to rise above. Stan did not do that here, and despite the majority at the 3rd DCA, eventually the Florida Supreme Court will agree with the original opinion, and the dissent in the En Banc, and Connelly will go free, scum bag that he is.
Professor: if the second degree murder lesser wasn't given, it's very possible that no "compromise" verdict would have been reached and that the jury would have convicted Connolly of first degree murder rather than letting him walk. Would that be a better result for the client? Moreover, recognizing that it was a mandatory lesser, slamming Blake for giving the instruction is just stupid.
Why is nobody talking about how badly Jason Bloch is going to lose to Marcia DelRey. She's smarter, more decisive, more ethical & has better judicial temperament than JackassJason
Well put about Rick Sanchez. I knew Rick when he was with Corlette-Killian as an attorney. ALways well prepared. His assent to the County Court was deserved. And he is with Emas the brains and classs of the 3dca. Rottenberg could not carry his briefcase. Fleisher and co-counsel blew the Connerally case by not moving for a DV on statute of limitation of murder 2. That is inexcusable but typical of the attorneys who make their living at the public trough with court appointments.
Why we should ignore Justice Scalia’s nasty zingers (WP)
The “Scaliafication” of judicial opinions .....
Justice Antonin Scalia ended up on the losing side of two of the biggest cases from the Supreme Court’s just-concluded term: King v. Burwell, the Obamacare case, and Obergefell v. Hodges, the same-sex marriage case. But his dissenting opinions were probably quoted more often, and more extensively, than the majority opinions that laid down the law. Who, after all, could resist including Scalia’s use of “jiggery-pokery” in a story about King, or otherwise focusing on Scalia’s “zingers” at the expense of the substance of the cases? Hardly anyone, apparently. Google “jiggery-pokery,” and you’ll see what I mean.
Read the entire story here:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/justice-scalias-appalling-
zingers/2015/07/31/0f5db50c-36f5-11e5-b673-1df005a0fb28
_story.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions&wpmm=1
Why did the Bar ambush us with this reciprocity issue? I can barely make a living now. What happens when all these snowbirds start practicing here.
The entire Board of Govenors should be immeached.
It is obvious that Albadin is using the presidency to advance his own firms interest. He is employed as an insurance defense lawyer paid by a San Francisco based insurance firm. He should be IMPEACHED immediately. What is the process for impeachment? I want to get it started.
blog
indent
all
Post a Comment