Tuesday, January 15, 2008


The Supreme Court is scheduled to resolve a conundrum they haven’t addressed in over sixty years: How can they look at themselves in the mirror every morning having voted to stop the re-count in Florida in 2000?

No, seriously: just what does the second amendment mean and what does it protect?

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear high powered semi-automatic weapons shall not be infringed.” Or something like that.

Here is the question on Nino Scalia’s mind: “Its Monday, are they serving baked chicken again in the Cafeteria?”

The reason Judge Scalia is worried about what he eats is that as a self proclaimed “semi-strict constructionist” his judicial philosophy might well lead him to a result his conservative friends will abhor and will give him heartburn. And if his conservative friends get upset, no more free hunting trips.

Lets take a look at the two parts of the Second Amendment:

Part I:
“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state" - a strict constructionist would call this “the purpose clause”, meaning the reason for the language to follow.

Therefore, interpreting the amendment is simple- once the army is well funded and armed, the purpose of the amendment has been satisfied. The term “well regulated militia” must refer to something more than a bunch of beer drinking guys out on the paint ball course on a Sunday afternoon. (Readers with a knowledge of history will recall that Thomas Jefferson loved, just loved, paintball.)

If you go on the Scotusblog website, you can read a fascinating amicus brief by two professors of English linguistics, HERE
with a specialty in 18th century English linguistics that arrive at the same opinion (albeit more elegantly). While long time and careful readers may question why Rumpole spent his weekend reading amicus briefs in a second amendment case instead of his more usual fare of racing forms and football statistical analysis spreadsheets, we shall save that answer for another day and more appropriate forum.

Like the baked chicken in the Supreme Court cafeteria that they serve on Mondays, the simple analysis based on original intent and plain meaning leaves people like Justice Scalia (not to mention his pal and sometimes hunting buddy Dick “shotgun in your face” Cheney ) so unsatisfied. There’s just got to be more.

Part II (the subject clause):

“the right of the people to keep and bear arms”

To “keep arms” must, our original intent theorists suggest, mean personally keep.

But, the liberals reply, the amendment doesn’t just say “keep arms” – it says “keep and bear arms” and as the Justice Department has recognized in an internal memo leaked to Rumpole, “keep and bear arms” plainly refers to “bearing arms” in a military context. Thus the amendment merely provides for the arming of the militia, not everyone else.

You see dear readers, what has occurred here, as in Bush v. Gore, is that the philosophical bent of the various collations of the Justices leads them to conclusions that are
opposite to the politics that got them on the court in the first place.

Ginsberg and Stevens and Breyer will all be arguing that strict construction based on plain reading and the framers' intent leads to the inescapable conclusion that the Second Amendment only protects the arms of citizens to populate a militia. And the military being well funded, the second amendment does not prohibit governmental restrictions (or..gasp ..bans) on firearms. The problem is that Ginsberg, et.al., have too much invested in a broader judicial philosophy in almost every other area of constitutional law to carry the strict constructionist banner in this, or any other case.

Thomas and Scalia and Alito and Roberts, are all torch carrying conservatives, and as such, the second amendment’s protection of their Neanderthal backers' right to shoot each other in the face during hunting trips is sacrosanct. Yet a traditional strict constructionist and original intent analysis leads them astray from the promised land:
a gun in everyone’s hand.

So what to do?

In Rumpole’s world, this second amendment case is the perfect storm of chickens coming home to roost. Each bloc of the court- liberal and conservative- must use the other side’s preferred method of constitutional analysis to arrive at the conclusion they prefer. Scalia and Thomas must find “life and breadth” as well as “penumbras” (see, Griswald v. Connecticut, and Justice Douglas’s creation of the “right to privacy” in a “penumbra” of the bill of rights) in the simple phrases they are reviewing, while Ginsberg and Breyer et.al., must argue for original intent to protect the government’s right to regulate firearms.

This is just too good to be true. It’s a game of constitutional chicken and the first one to blink is the first justice that abandons their judicial philosophy and admits to being result oriented.

Who will blink first?


Anonymous said...


A 'centrist' group, perhaps of only one or two justices, will join the four on the right and create an absolute right to keep arms, eschew the "bear arms" military reference, and give the states substantial leeway in restricting and controlling the persons who may 'keep', and the type of arms which they might be permitted to bear.

No artillery, no RPG's, no AK-47's, as a matter of 2nd Amendment 'right'.

Then the WISE PERSONS in the Florida legislature will figure out a way to make our streets even more dangerous by opening the floodgates to all types of armaments -- while forgetting that thugs with AK-47's kill cops, and that hunting Key Deer with a bazooka is a crime - and hardly sporting.

Anonymous said...

Breaking Blog News: Judge Jeri B. Cohen seeks re-election. In charge of her campaign is Attorney Alan J. Kluger, the husband of Judge Amy "Mean" Dean.

How will this play in the Cuban community given the custody case with whats his name sports agent and the Cuban father?

Rumpole said...

Always nice to get a prosecutor's point of view. In light of the tragedy this past week with the murder of the detective, it is a point well taken.

Anonymous said...

Judge Dean was an excellent judge.She demanded the highest standard in her court.Prosecutors and defense attorneys had to be prepared and she did not suffer foolishness very well.
Let us look at our lack of professionalism,our lack of preparedness etc.If we were to act as attorneys,not hacks we would be better off.The almighty dollar has turned the "profession"to a lousy business and this is unfortunate.They can go together,but we must act as professionals.

Anonymous said...

I am only going to say this once, so you listen, and you listen good, you bleeding heart pinko liberal jew pacifist who let 6 million of your brethern die because of your unwillingness to fight back. We will not allow the right to bear arms be infringed, it won't happen so stop fantasizing about a bunch panzies waving flowers and having love fests. /s/ The NRA, Trauma Nurses of America, American Society of ER Surgeons, Colt, Smith & Wesson, the U.S. Army, the U.S. Marine Corps, PBA, American Society of Penology, the Crips, The Bloods, Cubans Against Castro, and every other swinging dick organization in this country. If there were not meant to be shot, god would not put them in the path of my bullitt at that moment in time when it splatters their brainmatter on my shirt. Yeah tho I walk thru the valley of the shadow of criminals I will fear no evil because we got the court packed and I carry a 38. Now go back to your books while we weed out the minority criminals with our handguns.

Anonymous said...

thanks 10:08, but I think the Captain reported Cohen's filing at 7:00 PM earlier tonight.

Of course, I thinks he's smoking some wacky weed if he really thinks Prescott will be running for State Attorney or Public Defender

Anonymous said...

is it me or is there a violent shooting in miami gardens every week?

Anonymous said...

why did OJ's bondsmen do him like that? Free OJ

Anonymous said...

Is it true that Herb Walker called his own press conference yesterday in front of the Justice Building???

Anonymous said...

Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

Anonymous said...

"A well regulated militia" is today called the "National Guard". The Guard is under the control of the States unless nationalized for certain purposes. It would seem that the right to bear arms is limited to those members of the national guard.

Anonymous said...

What a bizarre analysis by Rumpole, which only a liberal could come up with. In reality, the following is true:

The Second Amendment guarantees the right of the people to arm itself against the government, not for the government. I guess one would have to be familiar with an event known as the Revolutionary War to know that.

Secondly, the inability of Rumpole and others to get over Bush v. Gore, which was not about stopping the counting of the votes but rather about Gore's using the counting process to invalidate votes for Bush is sad.

Jack Thompson, Still and Attorney

South Florida Lawyers said...

Interesting analysis, rumpy, I'm with you all the way on this one (and Bush/Gore).

Anonymous said...

hey Captain & Rumpole- what about the Breaking News - Dolphins name new head coach Tony Soprano at Noon today

Anonymous said...

Dear 11:28
Though you try, James Ellroy, you ain't. I know you are trying to be "funny" or I'd name a few brethren of mine who fought and died going after the Nazis as resistance fighters. I would have to agree though, those Jewish toddlers just let themselves be slaughtered. Wimps! Fake Anonymous



Collier Judge gets -itch-slapped by 2nd DCA .....

Yesterday I told you about a Collier County Court Judge, acting in his Circuit Court capacity, named Judge Michael Carr; who had decided to "push the envelope" and see what the appellate court would tell him to do.

Well, the 2nd DCA has spoken and they told Judge Carr to go back to law school, or at least to stick to his day job - that being a County Court Judge and not pretend to be a Circuit Court Judge - since he just can't seem to get that one right.

Seems Judge Carr just does not want to follow the law. The former head of the Republican Party in Collier County, Judge Carr has been on the bench less than one year and he continues to make headlines - for all the wrong reasons.

In the Miller case, Dayne Miller had been charged with Burglary. The arresting detective had recommended the standard bond of $5,000. The State had no problems with that amount.

On his own, Judge Carr decided to hold Miller PTD. His attorney filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus and the 2nd DCA immediately ordered Judge Carr to hold a pretrial release hearing and set a reasonable bond.

So, what did Judge Carr do. He again held the defendant PTD. In his order, he cited to a concurring opinion from another case where that judge expressed his personal belief that the State's failure to file a Motion for Pretrial Detention should not deprice the trial court of the ability to order the accused detained without bond. But the unanimous opinion and the law in that case still was that they did not have that power.

Well, the 2nd DCA has again sent the case back and ordered the lower court to give the defendant a bond. In its order, they went so far as to tell Judge Carr that he should have nothing to do with setting the bond in this case anymore. Instead, the bond should be set by either the Circuit Court Judge assigned the case or by the Chief Judge.

In sending Judge Carr back to law school, (so to speak), the 2nd stated to Carr: "we instruct the trial court that concurring opinions are not considered precedent."

You can read the opinion here:


CAPTAIN OUT .............

Rumpole said...

I must respectfully dissent from the opinion expressed by the only Florida Bar certified sane lawyer- Mr. Thompson.

I have merely laid out the pitfalls for the current supreme court here. The left has to rely on the reasoning of the right, and vice a versa.

Personally, and the Justice Department agrees with me (which isn't saying much) that the Second Amendment by its plain reading applies to the arming of militia. I say this as a gun owner. But I do not think I have a constitutional right to own a gun.

Anonymous said...

Jack Thompson--you won't be an attorney for much longer.............

Anonymous said...

So now like 12:25 we can say we're someone else and call someone fat, great!

Anonymous said...

It is written that "once the army is well funded and armed, the purpose of the amendment has been satisfied."

No. The Army, Navy and "State" Militias are secured by the Constitution. The second amendment, assuming it is not simply redundant verbiage, is meant to secure other rights beyond a well funded army.

Looking to the Bill of Rights in general, it is apparent that the rights secured are for "the people." Freedom of speech, for example, is not secured for newspapers and television... it is secured for individuals. Likewise Due Process, Speedy Trials, Cruel and Unusual punishment, etc.

The militias spoken of must be considered in the context in which they were referred to. Perhaps the most famous milita of the American Revoloution, the Green Mountain Boys, were essentially outlaws. Such groups were ad hoc and fluid in a time of political turmoil that involved French, English, Colonial and Native American interests. At the time, failing to secure an individual's right to own a gun would have represented an untenable restriction on the right to join with neighbors to protect local interests.

It is an outdated, unnecessary right. Still,v a strict-constructionist could easily justify upholding the personal right to keep high-powered semi automatic weapons. (Souter will concur citing stare decisis.)

Rumpole said...

2:05 - NO- It is a violation of blog rules. And I took the comment down. My bad.

Anonymous said...

I love this second amendment argument, can we discuss abortion next? how bout religion!

Anonymous said...

florida bar speech police are watching the Captain and his calling judges out for getting bitch slapped.

careful captain

Anonymous said...

Rumpole -- Just as an FYI, the neo-fascists at the Broward Blog have gone back to their old habits of deleting posts they don't like and modifying people's posts without comment or note.

Just wanted to let you know.

Anonymous said...

You took down a post calling someone FAT, and left up: Bleeding heart pinko liberal Jew pacifist.

Change that word Jew for one dispariging any other ethnic group (Black, Hispanic,etc.), and would it offend you as much as the word FAT?

Anonymous said...

I liked the first version better that said the right to arm bears....

Anonymous said...

To: 2:31

Today's Vermont National Guard are still known as the "Green Mountain Boys".

Rumpole said...

3:58- let me clue you in to my thought process. But before I begin, I want to thank you for being a careful reader.

When someone calls a person- say PersonX fat- it is a personally demeaning comment and I will remove it.

When some moron like the post about "liberal pinko jews" just uses dumb, ignorant language- I leave it up because 1) it does not identify anyone in particular; and 2) the more your shine the light on idiots like that, the less appealing their message is.

Want to make dumb racists seem interesting? Censor them. Then they become forbidden and enticing. Want to show that they are boring idiots? Let them have their say.

Thus, as stupid and ignorant as that comment is, I allow it up in the interest of beating them at their own game.

That is my thought process.

Anonymous said...


Hunting anything with a bazooka would be fun.

Anonymous said...


you are a Bleeding heart pinko liberal Jew pacifist!

Anonymous said...

As a Jew, I find it offensive that other Jews are being such dense Jews. The guy was joking...read the comment.

Anonymous said...

As a Jew and an atheist, am I only allowed to get offended when people insult the Jewish culture, but not when they insult the Jewish religion? For instance, hook nosed bookish horned Jew bastard should insult me, but, "Ha! Monotheism. How ridiculous!" should not insult me. Please someone help with an advisory opinion. I don't know when to get offended.

Also, the comment at 11:28, in context, was very funny, and not at all offensive. That said, its analysis was wrong, as was yours Rump. The second amendment protects people from the government. it does not protect the government. Bush v. Gore on the other hand was tragic.

Anonymous said...

Somebody somewhere just got arrested.

(all together now)


(i don't know why, i just love that.)

Anonymous said...

Hey I'm new here. What's the scoop?

Rumpole said...

5:03 I have a fairly good idea who you are. And I am disappointed. This blog is not for you.

Anonymous said...

Vic Vedmen is the coolest lawyer in the justice buidling. A cross between Frank Sinatra and Vladamir Putin, he is one hip ruskie.

Anonymous said...

Freddy Moldovan is cooler.

Anonymous said...

WE THE PEOPLE are the MILITIA. The Guard & Reseres are auxillary units of the U.S. Armed Forces, they are not the Militia. Historically, the Militia was the armed citizens repelling attacks ( from Native Inhabidents , the French, Spanish and finally the Brits [ then as we stole westard the natives again]. Florida's Constitution specically defines the Militia as all able bodied citizens and those expressing their desire to be citizens.
Besides the Lord may have made me but Mr. Colt made me equal.
D. Sisselman

Anonymous said...

rumpole: you're fat

Anonymous said...

Guns don't kill people, bullets kill people!

Anonymous said...

guns don't kill people , people kill people, except recently a man went hunting with his dog and the dog hit the trigger and the gun fired and the man died, killed by his dog. cigarettes don't kill people, you never should have started smoking, drunks don't kill people but their cars do, pedophiles don't abuse children-the child wanted it. I AM SO PROUD OF THE INTELLECTUAL SOPHISTICATION IN THE U.S. Now the USSCT will intellectually justify the right to bear arms while we continue to have teenagers commit mass murder with machine guns, people killed without compensation because they assumed the risk of attending school, and more murders in one year than just about any 10 nations you pick in the world has in one year combined. What a country, go Tony Sorano. P.S. I apologize for the holocost reference in my satire of 1128p.m. /s/ le onion peeler.

Anonymous said...

its all about julio gutierrez, he's the dreamiest

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

I am cooler.

Anonymous said...

Rumpole I am sitting here with a few jurist and we are mad that you left the jew comments up. Take them down or you lose some power readers!

Anonymous said...

Dudes!!!! Joel Denaro is the coolest.

He's James Bond...70's retro Bachman Turner Overdrive Takin Care of Business cool.

He's the Tom Brady of Trial lawyers. Cool in the pocket under pressure.

He's Christian Slater cool.
One cool dude, dude.

Rumpole said...

8:24- may I respectfully suggest your problem is who you associate with.

That being said, don't you think the moron who wrote it is best viewed by his inability to spell and otherwise get his point across?

When you censor people like that, you make them victims. Better to expose their idiocy and move on. I'm sure your Judicial friends can grasp that simple point. Then again...

Anonymous said...

hey Rumpole, what say you about that idiot judge in Collier County that keeps denying bond for a simple burglary.

this is the type of judge that needs some serious opposition. doesn't David Brenner live over there; isn't he defending on the Taylor case. maybe he can run against the nut.

(people for the ethical treatment of criminals)

Anonymous said...

The USSCT used international pressure, recent psychological studies, and the fact that we were one of if not the only nation that would contemplate executing juveniles and the mentally retarded until 2 recent decisions. The same rational should be utiized to find that the forefathers in 1776-1789 did not envision a nation where 12-15000 are killed a year by handguns when the nation is not at war with a repressive monarchy. Modern America requires amendment of the 2nd amendment just as women were given the right to vote, 18 year olds were given the right to vote, the draft was done away with, blacks can vote, prohibition repealed. If nothing else- please JUSTICES OF THE USSCT differentiate between the right to hunt deer, protect yourself against a grizzly, a police agency or the federal military to be adequately equipped, and people having handguns in public to rob, kidnap and kill and for the citizenry to be unsafe in schools.

Anonymous said...

Oh JD is too cool.

And I should know.

Anonymous said...

Too bad the Jews of Germany didn't have a Second Amendment to rely on.

Anonymous said...

Oh Michael, Michael, Michael what a mess we have on our hands.


Anonymous said...

Why hate on Denaro? Because at 35 he is infinitely more successful than you will ever be.

Also, D Sisselman always has great comments, but can't spell for shit.

Anonymous said...

Supreme Court of Florida


CASE NO.: SC08-2

Lower Tribunal No(s). :
2007-CA-2898, 1 D07-6544




The First District Court of Appeal has certified, pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(5) of the Constitution of Florida, that the trial court passes upon a question of great public importance requiring immediate resolution by this Court.

We accept jurisdiction.
Briefs shall be filed as follows: Petitioner's brief on the merits shall be filed on or before 3:00 p.m. January 25,2008; Respondent's answer brief on the merits shall be filed on or before 3:00 p.m. February 4,2008; and Petitioner's reply brief on the merits shall be filed on or before 3:00 p.m. February 11,2008. Please file an original and seven copies of all briefs.


Per this Court's Administrative Order In Re: Mandatory Submission of Electronic Copies of Documents, AOSC04-84, dated September 13,2004, counsel are directed to transmit a copy of all briefs in an electronic format as required by the provisions of that order.

The Clerk of the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit shall file the original record which shall be properly indexed and paginated on or before January 25,2008.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the above case has been set for oral argument at 9:00 a.m., Wednesday, February 27,2008, with a maximum of twenty minutes to the side allowed for the argument.


A True Copy Test:

vm Served:

Anonymous said...

t.o. is pretty cool

Anonymous said...

There only reason the nation is not at war with a repressive monarchy, is because we like living under it.

Anonymous said...

First of all I don't hate Joel Denaro. This is a compliment- as I believe all the other ones were as well.

He is not just 007 James Bond cool. He is Sean Connery as 007 sitting by the pool at the Fountainbleau playing Gin against Goldfinger-cool.

And that's pretty cool.

Anonymous said...

May I interject here?

Isn't Joel Denaro more of the George Clooney in Ocean's Eleven cool?

I mean the part where he walks into the restaurant to see his ex-wife Julia Roberts and sits down and waiter asks if he wants a drink and he says "whiskey and a whiskey."

Just too cool.

Anonymous said...

Hey guys, I'm cool.

Oscar Meyer has a way.....

Anonymous said...

10:24 said........."Too bad the Jews of Germany didn't have a Second Amendment to rely on."

That's one of the dumbest things I ever heard. The German army crushed everything in its way until we got involved. You think armed citizens would stand a better chance than the Poles, French, Brits and Russians did? (yes, I mention the Brits adn Russians. Britian barely survived the German aerial assault. Additionally, until Hitler overextended and was stalled by the Russian winter, the German army was rolling over the Russian army). A German "2nd Amendment" would'nt have done a damn thing. So save your rhetoric.

South Florida Lawyers said...

Jews, the Second Amendment, this feels I'm back listening to Alan Burke.

Anonymous said...

The issue before the court is whether petitioner has the right under the 2nd amendment to the U.S. Constitution to possess a handgun in her home in violation of an ordinance in the city of Washington D.C. which prohibits handgun ownership by private citizens. We hold that the 2nd Amendment confers upon the military to be adequately armed including national guard units in the individual states and an individual also has the right to bear arms. IN the 1700s the fact that individuals had arms was the necessar;y prerequisite to revolting against a totalitarian regime, monarchy, and led to the war of independence and ultimate formation of the 13 colonies. The U. S. has grown to 50 states and has lived under the constitution of 1789 , with few amendments, for over 200 years now, unprecedented in the history of man. We are sympathetic to the arguments that there is extreme violence by the use of one type of arm, the handgun, but we see this as more of a social science issue as opposed to an individual liberty issue. The explosion in gun violence has a multitude of factors, including breakdown of the family structure, school dropouts, access to illegal narcotics, single family homes, violent images in the media, music, and now video games, and the lack of strong father figures in the home, after school programs, and a lack of societal initiative in combating this problem which is largely confined to approximately 50 metropolitan areas comprising less than 20 % of the U.S. population. Therefore, we will not restrict the individual liberty rights of all because a fragmented problem spread out over the entire continent is largely one due to individual communities tolerating gun violence and not using resources to combat it. In the last 30 years one of the primary expenditures of taxpayer dollars in the major metropolitan areas has been the proliferation, construction, and expansion of the NFL, NBA, MLB,NHL, and NCAA campuses. For example in Miami the University of Miami recently constructed a new sports areana whcih never sells out, approximnately 750 million dollars was spent on an opera house which is not used, and the city has 2 NBA ready basketball arensa for 1 team, has a perfectly fine football stadium with plans to renovate or replace it, and is planning to build a baseball staduim. Conspicuously absent from the local public debate is an expenditure to combat juvenile crime in one of the most violent cities in America. A similar analysis of LA,NY,Chicago will yeild similar results. Therefor we hold that the people of the US have determined that a culture precicated on providing comfortable sports arenas for 3 hours events to worship athletes takes precedence over the safety of the community and ameliorating juvenile delinquency and therefore uphold the rights of the individual to arm herself/himself when the local community leaders have abdicated their responsibility to protect the public req;uiring the citizen to have the right to bear arms to, if they wish, attempt to protect themself in a society that is violent and not only condones it but seems to worship it in our media, nightly news, sports, video games, movies and tolerance. In the last 10 years their have been dozens of shootings often in the most unlikely of places, collge campuses, elementary schools, churches, and yet no violent demonstrations in the streets as in the civil rights movement, no boycotts, strikes, speeches, just indifference and acquiescense. Therefore we hold that a citizen of the U.S. has the right to bear arms because there has been a complete breakdown by law enforcement and public officials, particularly in large population centers, to not only rectify the problem but have for the most part ignored it and therefore the average citizen must take their protection into their own hands and we will not take away that right until major changes occur in society which obviate the necessity for a citizen to have to contemplate , rightfully so, that at any given moment, whether at home, work, traveling by private or public transportation, in public, alone or with others, in the presence of security or not, they stand the real risk of being assaulted, robbed or murdered by someone possessing a handgun and therefore have the right of self defense and to arm themselves. Affirmed. /s/ the onion peeler

Anonymous said...

I demand the following:

1. A retractable-roof baseball stadium;
2. The right to carry a concealed handgun;
3. 2 dollar-gas; and
4. Lower taxes.

Anonymous said...

The second amendment has nothing to do with a personal right to posses firearms. At the time when the bill of rights was drafted guns were as much a part of daily life as shoes, or candles. Guns were necessary for getting meat, as protection against, Indians, brigands, highwaymen, grizzly bears, wolfs etc . It never would have occurred to the founders, or anyone else at that time that the govt would try to outlaw the personal ownership of firearms. The second amendment is about the people being entitled to form non govt militias and arm them selves with military type weapons to fight against the government in the event the govt becomes tyrannical. Read Jefferson it is all in there.

Anonymous said...

Florida S.Ct. reinstates stay:

The Court has considered the Appellants’ emergency motion to reinstate the automatic stay provided to them under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.310(b)(2) in appeals taken by the State of Florida and by public officials acting in their official capacity; and the Court has further considered the trial court's order, the responses filed by the parties in the trial court and in this Court, the record in this cause, and the criteria for vacating automatic stays, and hereby concludes that Appellee, Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Inc., has not demonstrated the compelling circumstances required for vacating Appellants’ automatic stay that is provided under rule 9.310(b)(2). Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion to reinstate the automatic stay filed pursuant to rule 9.310(b)(2) is granted and the trial court's order dated January 11, 2008, which in part vacated the automatic stay, is hereby vacated. The automatic stay of proceedings in favor of
Appellants, who are public officials acting in their official capacity, is reinstated.
ANSTEAD, J., did not participate.



Anonymous said...

Thanks for the history lesson Jason Grey. What a scribe I tell you. Please stick to the glory day stories of what a fine pugilist you once were.

Anonymous said...

to 231, excellent points and analysis. do you want to be the one to tell the relatives of 12000 people a year why their will not be anti-handgun possession laws. what if one of your loved ones gets murdered. the official statistics are that you have about the same chance of being hit by lightning, attacked by a shark (the nonlawyer ones) , win the lottery, than successfully defend yourself with a handgun.

Anonymous said...

joel denaro cool? please. his pal country is way cooler

Anonymous said...

WHOEVER YOU ARE ONION PEELER, you need to get laid, get some clients, get a life, you are too serious dude. now stay off this blog until you have some fun or I or my hommies will put a cap in your ass.

Anonymous said...

thanks for the info on jason grey getting hit in the head a lot as a boxer. now i know why he made fu;n of me all the time when i never did anything to him, except be a much better lawyer but not businessman. i don't know how to get 5000 to seal a file that can't be sealed.

Anonymous said...

3:26...........Grey is a cool guy. He makes fun of himself much more than he makes fun of others. You need to stop taking everything so seriously.

Anonymous said...

Jason Grey can read?

Anonymous said...

Don’t believe one optimistic word from any public figure about the economy or humanity in general. They are all part of the problem. Its like a game of Monopoly. In America, the richest 1% now hold 1/2 OF ALL UNITED STATES WEALTH. Unlike ‘lesser’ estimates, this includes all stocks, bonds, cash, and material assets held by America’s richest 1%. Even that filthy pig Oprah acknowledged that it was at about 50% in 2006. Naturally, she put her own ‘humanitarian’ spin on it. Calling attention to her own ‘good will’. WHAT A DISGUSTING HYPOCRITE SLOB. THE RICHEST 1% HAVE LITERALLY MADE WORLD PROSPERITY ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE. Don’t fall for all of their ‘humanitarian’ CRAP. ITS A SHAM. THESE PEOPLE ARE CAUSING THE SAME PROBLEMS THEY PRETEND TO CARE ABOUT. Ask any professor of economics. Money does not grow on trees. The government can’t just print up more on a whim. At any given time, there is a relative limit to the wealth within ANY economy of ANY size. So when too much wealth accumulates at the top, the middle class slip further into debt and the lower class further into poverty. A similar rule applies worldwide. The world’s richest 1% now own over 40% of ALL WORLD WEALTH. This is EVEN AFTER you account for all of this ‘good will’ ‘humanitarian’ BS from celebrities and executives. ITS A SHAM. As they get richer and richer, less wealth is left circulating beneath them. This is the single greatest underlying cause for the current US recession. The middle class can no longer afford to sustain their share of the economy. Their wealth has been gradually transfered to the richest 1%. One way or another, we suffer because of their incredible greed. We are talking about TRILLIONS of dollars. Transfered FROM US TO THEM. Over a period of about 27 years. Thats Reaganomics for you. The wealth does not ‘trickle down’ as we were told it would. It just accumulates at the top. Shrinking the middle class and expanding the lower class. Causing a domino effect of socio-economic problems. But the rich will never stop. They will never settle for a reasonable share of ANYTHING. They will do whatever it takes to get even richer. Leaving even less of the pie for the other 99% of us to share. At the same time, they throw back a few tax deductable crumbs and call themselves ‘humanitarians’. IT CAN’T WORK THIS WAY. This is going to end just like a game of Monopoly. The current US recession will drag on for years and lead into the worst US depression of all time. The richest 1% will live like royalty while the rest of us fight over jobs, food, and gasoline. Crime, poverty, and suicide will skyrocket. So don’t fall for all of this PR CRAP from Hollywood, Pro Sports, and Wall Street PIGS. ITS A SHAM. Remember: They are filthy rich EVEN AFTER their tax deductable contributions. Greedy pigs. Now, we are headed for the worst economic and cultural crisis of all time. SEND A “THANK YOU” NOTE TO YOUR FAVORITE MILLIONAIRE. ITS THEIR FAULT. I’m not discounting other factors like China, sub-prime, or gas prices. But all of those factors combined still pale in comparison to that HUGE transfer of wealth to the rich. Anyway, those other factors are all related and further aggrivated because of GREED. If it weren’t for the OBSCENE distribution of wealth within our country, there never would have been such a market for sub-prime to begin with. Which by the way, was another trick whipped up by greedy bankers and executives. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. The credit industry has been ENDORSED by people like Oprah, Ellen, Dr Phil, and many other celebrities. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. So don’t fall for their ‘humanitarian’ BS. ITS A SHAM. NOTHING BUT TAX DEDUCTABLE PR CRAP. Bottom line: The richest 1% will soon tank the largest economy in the world. It will be like nothing we’ve ever seen before. and thats just the beginning. Greed will eventually tank every major economy in the world. Causing millions to suffer and die. Oprah, Angelina, Brad, Bono, and Bill are not part of the solution. They are part of the problem. EXTREME WEALTH HAS MADE WORLD PROSPERITY ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE. WITHOUT WORLD PROSPERITY, THERE WILL NEVER BE WORLD PEACE OR ANYTHING EVEN CLOSE. GREED KILLS. IT WILL BE OUR DOWNFALL. Of course, the rich will throw a fit and call me a madman. Of course, their ignorant fans will do the same. You have to expect that. But I speak the truth. If you don’t believe me, then copy this entry and run it by any professor of economics or socio-economics. Then tell a friend. Call the local radio station. Re-post this entry or put it in your own words. Be one of the first to predict the worst economic and cultural crisis of all time and explain its cause. WE ARE IN BIG TROUBLE.