Blog of law articles

Well, I've walked these streets
in a spectacle of wealth and poverty
in the diamond markets
the scarlet welcome carpet
that they just rolled out for me

And I've walked these streets
in the mad house asylum
they can be
where a wild eyed misfit prophet
on a traffic island stopped
and he raved of saving me

Oh trial courts, why do you torture the 3d DCA so?

Whenever I edit briefs by an associate, I am reminded of that great line from V.S. Naipaul's A House For Mr. Biswas, when Mr. Burnett, the editor of the Trinidad Sentinel, gives out advice every writer needs but rarely hears:

"'Considerably' is a big word meaning 'very,' which is a pointless word any way. And look. 'Several' has seven letters. 'Many' has only four and oddly enough has exactly the same meaning."

The 3d today was a carnival, and even Natalie's beautiful voice and provocative dancing cannot save me from what my hypnotized, mesmerized eyes have seen:

Nack Holdings v. Kalb:

Raoul Cantero in da' house! (h/t Michael Steele).

Sheesh, you'd have to be a rocket scientist or Judge Salter to make heads or tails of these facts, but the Judge breaks it all down with his usual flair and patience:

In a complex series of loan and real estate transactions worthy of analysis by Professor Boyer or inclusion in a law school final exam, we conclude that the appellee and its predecessors in interest attempted to circumvent a controlling Florida statute.

The Judge even name checks the late UM Professor Ralph Boyer! See, I told you this guy is a mensch.

The opinion, though, is for real estate fetishists only (I know a few of you are out there).

Granada Insurance v. Triangle Fire, Inc.:

Triangle Fire? That's really the name of your company? What was it that Justice Souter was saying about teaching history in our schools?

Oh well, it's Judge Schwartz again, this time quashing an order by Judge Zabel that would have allowed the plaintiff to depose the King of Spain, excuse me, the President of Granada Insurance to determine why he won't just pay the plaintiff's claim:

We quash the order. Our decision is based upon the universally applied rule that discovery which concerns only potential issues of bad faith or other purported improprieties in defending the claim are wholly impermissible unless and until it is determined that the policy indeed provides coverage.

Judge, respectfully, it's not a "universally applied rule" -- just ask Judge Zabel!

Plus, go with "universal rule" or "rule." Just a suggestion.

Oops, here comes another universally applied rule that is routinely ignored:

Downright Engineering v. Overland Carriers:

Repeat after me, you can't just appeal an order granting summary judgment:

Because “the law is settled that an order which merely grants a motion for summary judgment and does not otherwise contain the traditional words of finality is not a final order subject to appellate review,” we agree with Overland’s contention and dismiss the appeal as premature.

State court -- oy.

I told you, it's a carnival out there.