One lawyer's folly is another lawyer's ….?
Miami is an ethnic town. Nothing brings a smile to our face than to hear a lawyer of Hispanic descent say "mazel-tov" to a Jewish lawyer who has experienced a joyous event in their life. Or the reverse- a gringo lawyer using a Spanish expression to a Hispanic colleague. It is our differences which make us stronger.
Which brings us to the definition of Chutzpah, a Yiddish word. There are many definitions, but here's a good one:
Filing multiple motions to disqualify the 3rd DCA when they deny each one. Albert Einstein famously said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Einstein was never specifically asked this, but we think it's pretty crazy to keep asking the 3rd DCA to recuse themselves because they are prejudiced and biased against homeowners.
Chutzpah is telling the 3rd DCA that they are, as a body dishonest and not impartial.
Chutzpah is telling the 3rd DCA that they "falsified facts" in the record and ignored the proper standard of review.
And finally, Chutzpah is filling for cert to the US SUPREME COURT the denial of the Florida Supreme Court to review the decisions of the 3rd DCA, and in that filing saying...
You get the idea..and in reading the RSC it is pretty clear the 3rd DCA took a fairly dim view of having their opinions trashed to the feds.
There is an old adage of not picking a fight with an institution who buys ink by the barrel. For our millennial readers, there used to be things called newspapers that were printed on something called paper and the words on the paper were printed using ink and the adage means not fighting with a newspaper because they can swamp you with negative articles.
There is corollary which applies to not picking a fight with an appellate court that has the final say on all of your cases. To do so is ….(all together now) Chutzpah!
Judge: "Counsel if what you say is true, I will have to throw out all my legal books."
Lawyer: "Judge, why don't you try reading them first."
These are the types of things we all want to say, but shouldn't.
There isn't a blog in the land who is harder on those who wear black every day to work. And it's not that we are fighting for the dignity of the court- but the dignity of a court is worth fighting for. A court as an institution is worthy of respect because the institution of the court is a powerful check on the executive branch and the institution of the court stands for the proposition of equal justice before the law for everyone who appears in court.
And when that does not happen you do not win by trashing the court (although we love the PD who filed a writ of mandamus with the Florida Supreme Court against the 3rd for not ruling in his case...and won!). You win by outthinking your opponent-which as a general proposition when dealing with "they who shall not be named" is not as hard as it might first appear.
Dom Draper, that great American hero, famously said if you don't like the answer, change the question.
There's more than one way to skin a cat and there's more than one way to win a case. And the surest way to lose a case is by trashing the court. Because in doing so, you demean yourself and make yourself no better than POTUS 45 and who wants to be mentioned with him in the same breath?
So our advice is stop fighting with the denizens of the campus next to FIU. Figure out a better way... and while you're at it, hire a great defense attorney because in reading the below Rule, mi amigo, you are going to need it!
(*The title of the post comes from a concluding quote in the Rule. Whomever authored that has some game.)