Blog of law articles

Hi folks, well it's tax day and I know like good little attorneys all of you have cut a nice check and applied for your first extension. See how easy that was!

But not our busy resplendently robed scriveners to the south. Ensconced in their concrete bunker by the highway, they spend their days filled with laughter, love, and PCAs; their nights consumed with thoughts of the unburdened ones, those non-responsible persons in their slew of non-responsible positions -- oh how liberating it must be to merely shape young minds and teach them how to read, or get a knot out of of someone's back. How inconsequential and pointless it all must be!

Still, Wednesdays are their time. No extensions for the weary -- gentlepeople, the coffee will not swill itself.

And so we begin:

Infolink Group v. Kurzweg:

I don't claim to be a legal scholar (well, to be honest, I do make that claim), but see if you think the cited case and parenthetical appear to be on point:

Appellee, James Christopher Kurzweg, filed a motion in the Circuit Court to confirm an American Arbitration Association award. The trial court entered the order, which is the subject of this appeal, confirming the award but has not entered a final judgment. This Court lacks jurisdiction to hear this appeal as an order confirming an arbitration award is a non-appealable non-final order. See Parvin v. Valhalla Props., 949 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (holding that an order confirming or denying confirmation of an arbitration award is a non-appealable non-final order)

Hmm, looks like a pretty good find there.

So I guess the problem is that Section 682.20(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2007), which purports to authorize such an appeal, violates the Florida Constitution because the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure do not provide for an appeal of a non-final order confirming or vacating an arbitration award.

In other words, way to make a simple issue unduly hard, folks.

Cooper v. Cooper:

You know it's slim picking for 3d DCA Watch when we have to discuss a divorce opinion.

I do like this one though because it contains the following:

We affirm the final judgment awarding sanctions insofar as it imposed sanctions against the former wife’s trial counsel individually (and in fact that attorney did not appeal that judgment). We reverse that portion of the final judgment, however, which imposed the sanctions of $8,066.60 against the attorney and the former wife, jointly and severally. Based on the record presented here, the events which gave rise to the sanctions—an unprofessional bit of gamesmanship involving the preparation and deposition of an expert witness—were not caused, aided, or abetted by any action on the part of the former wife. We therefore vacate that portion of the final judgment entering judgment against the former wife “jointly and severally,” while affirming that judgment as imposed against her trial counsel individually.

"An unprofessional bit of gamesmanship involving the preparation and deposition of an expert witness"??

What does that mean? What happened exactly?

All I know is the "preparation and deposition of an expert witness" almost always involves an "unprofessional bit of gamesmanship" -- at least if you do it right. Civil litigators, back me up here!

Sheesh, you guys really need to be more specific.