COMING THURSDAY- You're not going to want to miss this one. The Gosney Complaint! You asked for it, and we got it.
We were bored waiting for a judge who was late, and took to reading Federalist Ten authored by James Madison. He was not only quite profound, but fairly prescient when he wrote
"It is in vain to say, that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm."
Perhaps the understatement of the millennium.
Madison was examining the ability of the republic to handle various "factions" that would not always been seeking to act in the public good. In that regard he wrote another paragraph that some people, educated and not wearing MAGA hats, may find similarly prescient in describing a congress that current has the backbone of a bowl of soup and the integrity of a Hialeah property inspector at the end of the month:
Under such a regulation, it may well happen that the public voice pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good, than if pronounced by the people themselves convened for the purpose. On the other hand, the effect may be inverted. Men of factious tempers, of local prejudices, or of sinister designs, may by intrigue, by corruption, or by other means, first obtain the suffrages, and then betray the interests of the people.
Now we do not expect the loyal members of the federalist society to get much out of this post. They simply join a club to help them become a judge, or stay one, without the slightest understanding (or desire to understand) the nature of philosophy and how concepts like epistemology affects the answer to questions like "what are rights?" and "where do rights come from?"
“…they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights..,”
ReplyDeleteThe Declaration of Independence
Orthodox Federalists embrace our Constitutional framework to the extreme. And we see that when convenient, the Republican Party embraces the Orthodox Federalist. However, cognitive dissonance must be stirring when the President, under the guise of emergency, goes autocratic and spits in the eye of Constitutional doctrine. Tariffs? No Writ of Habeas Corpus? Due process? National Guard? So many ways to go off the rails.
ReplyDeleteRumpole. Former Judge here.
ReplyDeleteThe Captain posted a comment last week about the Gosney lawsuit. I read the Complaint. A real doozy. From the Captain’s comment:
Gosney alleges in his complaint that the Miami Herald "purposefully began pressuring the State Attorney's office to fire Gosney through publications attempting to equate Gosney's personal views and beliefs with villains in his fictional book."
Count I: Defamation – The McClatchy Co. d/b/a/ The Miami Herald
Count II – Defamation – Wallman, Indvidually
Count III – Defamation – Blaskey, Individually
Count IV – Tortious Interference with a Business Relationship –
The McClatchy Co. d/b/a The Miami Herald
Count V - Tortious Interference with a Business Relationship –
Wallman, Individually
Count VI - Tortious Interference with a Business Relationship –
Blaskey, Individually
The basis of the Complaint stems from the stories published on July 3, 2024 and August 2, 2024.
The Case Number is 2025-017511-CA-01 and has been assigned to Judge Robert Watson. Gosney is represented by Fort Myers attorneys Joseph E. Parrish, Robert H. Goodman and Megan E. Shaw of Parrish & Goodman.
I am adding the following: Here are the elements to proving the allegations
To prove tortious interference with a business relationship, a plaintiff must establish (1) the existence of a valid business relationship or expectancy, (2) the defendant's knowledge of this relationship, (3) the defendant's intentional interference, (4) the defendant's lack of justification for the interference, and (5) resulting economic harm.
What do you think Rumpole. Can Gosney prove his case. On what element/s does he fail. Will he get past Summary Judgment. Or will this be a fact based matter left for a jury to decide.
What do I think ? The next civil complaint I read in its entirety will be the first. I have no idea. Or desire to get into this. There is so much more to life than reading meaningless civil complaints.
DeleteMadison wasn’t warning that politics is doomed or that we just have to accept bad leaders; in Federalist 10 he explained how a constitutional system could manage opposing camps by using representation, separation of powers, and the scale of a large republic. Your post skips past his argument and instead leans on mid jokes and modern caricatures, which might get laughs but does nothing to show you actually understood what Madison wrote.
ReplyDelete"We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it," Kimmel said.
ReplyDelete