Well there's a rose in the fisted glove
And the eagle flies with the dove
And if you can't be with the one you love honey.....

Can you believe Mark Sanford actually pulled out the "I did not sleep with that woman" defense:

Sanford also said that he "crossed the lines" with a handful of other women during 20 years of marriage, but not as far as he did with his mistress.

"There were a handful of instances wherein I crossed the lines I shouldn't have crossed as a married man, but never crossed the ultimate line," he said.

"The ultimate line" -- I like that a lot.

"Hey baby, ready to cross the ultimate line"? Once you go over, you never go back.

BTW, I've been working on maintaining my ultimate line for as long as possible -- it's a tantric sorta thing.

Hmm, two days of interviews with the AP, yet the reporter never managed to ask the Governor about squaring his refusal to resign with his public votes and denunciation of that other guy who never crossed the ultimate line:

In 1998, Sanford was a Republican congressman from South Carolina when he demanded "moral clarity" from Clinton and called on him to resign. "Very damaging stuff. This one's pretty cut and dried," Sanford told The Post and Courier in September 1998. "I think it would be much better for the country and for him personally [to resign]." So far, Sanford has not indicated that he has any plans to resign as governor.

Ok Governor, I think I grok you:

Don't be angry - don't be sad
Don't sit crying over good times you've had
There's a girl right next to you
And she's just waiting for something to do

Speaking of lovin' the one you're with, Michael Hanzman has gone and done it again -- effective July 1, he will be of counsel to his buddy Scott Link at Ackerman, Link & Sartory, P.A.

And his former partner and permanent citrus crusader Bobby Gilbert is now teamed up with Bruce Rogow and Jeremy Alters.

No snark; these are good fits all around.

Congrats boys, and good luck!

Anyone remember that Banco Santander/Madoff suit pending before Judge Huck?

Well it looks like the defendants got together and decided to just bombard the court with motions to dismiss.

I'm not sure but I think even Judge Huck filed one, that's how many motions there are to wade through.

The main one filed by Banco Santander asserts that the allegations of securities fraud do not have a United States nexus and the securities laws cannot apply extraterritorially.

It's a pretty interesting read and remarkable that they got it in under 20 pages.

Brevity is the soul of wit, kids.

(I expect Judge Huck to be issuing orders on these motions by this afternoon).

I see Judge Huck refused to enjoin Santander from contacting their Madoff-affected clients and offering individual resolutions:

About 70 percent of Banco Santander SA customers offered compensation for losses linked to Bernard Madoff have decided to accept it, lawyers for Spain’s biggest bank told a Miami court.

Clients of the Santander, Spain-based bank are agreeing to the offer because it gives them “something in hand, they are getting something today,” Sam Danon, a lawyer representing the company in a suit filed by investors in federal court in Miami, said at a hearing today.

. . . .

U.S. District Judge Paul C. Huck in Miami refused to order Santander officials to stop all “direct and indirect” contact with clients whose money was invested in products linked to Madoff while lawyers seek to organize investors’ cases against the bank.

Congrats Sam, nice win btw.

Here's the part I like. Contrast the two statements being made about this development from counsel for the putative class based in Madrid, Fernando Zunzunegui, and from Michael Hanzman:

Fernando Zunzunegui, a Madrid-based lawyer representing Santander customers considering claims against the bank over Madoff, is among lawyers and analysts who say the preferred shares it’s offering may only be worth a fifth of the value of the clients’ original investments.

And here's what Michael says:

“I’ve been advising people who call me about the settlement to weigh and decide if it’s a good deal for them,” said Michael Hanzman, a Miami-based lawyer representing investors who have sued the bank over Madoff losses.

I have to say, I'm with Mike on that one.

We've previously written about the $22.5 billion RICO suit that Podhurst's Steven Marks brought in Russia against the Bank of New York Mellon, which involved an expert affidavit by none other than Michael Hanzman.

Forbes previously reported that the plaintiffs were looking at something like $800 million as a reasonable settlement figure.

Looks like that didn't go too well:

The Bank of New York Mellon has reached an agreement to settle a $22.5 billion lawsuit by the Russian government for $14 million, after the two sides made a separate deal for a trade-financing pact, a senior Russian government official said Wednesday.

Alexei Kudrin, the Russian finance minister, told legislators that the giant American bank will cover legal costs incurred during the two-year suit, which was tied to a late 1990s scandal in which a bank executive was accused of secretly moving $7.5 billion out of the country.

Mr. Kudrin said that the Russian Federal Customs Service, which brought the suit, had “insufficient” evidence to win the case, which was being heard in Moscow Arbitration Court.

So the $14 million covers Steve's fees and costs, and that's it?

Ok, maybe that's not a bad result after all.