Trackbacks

• Trackbacks are closed for this post.

Comments

• 12/21/2007 2:11 PM Anonymous wrote:
  Nice work!!!!
  
• 12/21/2007 3:03 PM Anonymous wrote:
  Has anyone else noticed how much more gets done now that Conway is leading the charge.
  Way to go Sean - keep up the good work.
  I propose a name change JAABlog to SCBlog.
  Can I get an amen.
  
• 12/21/2007 4:04 PM picture of eric wrote:
  http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/broward/sfl-1221salesman,0,1614538.story
  
• 12/21/2007 4:56 PM Anonymous wrote:
  Wow -- Eric's put on a couple of lb's recently. Is Schwartzreich Yiddish for Porky?
  
• 12/21/2007 5:11 PM Anonymous wrote:
  Oh, now we like FACDL. I see.
  
• 12/21/2007 6:46 PM Anonymous wrote:
  Would you shut up already? Shouldn't you be out shopping for gifts for your loved ones. Oh wait....nevermind. You have to have them in order to need to buy for them. Maybe you can buy gifts for those judges whose teat you still try to suck from, apologist.
  
• 12/21/2007 7:25 PM Anonymous wrote:
  Good, I am glad. I am not on the wheel, neither is my partner. Keeping the tallentless on the wheel keeps us charging more money. The more wheel hacks there are, the more money we make. So many idiots make their living off the wheel and hardly have any privately retained cases.
  
  It is simply a matter of supply and demand. When the tallentless no longer have a place to make a living, they are going to flood the private paying market offering to handle DUI's and DV's for $1,500 a pop. The wheel keeps them out of the market and keeps my fee high.
  
• 12/21/2007 8:05 PM STATE APPEALS wrote:
  FACDL WEBSITE FOR STATE'S NOTICE OF APPEAL:
  
  http://www.facdl.org./Images/NoticeAppealFACDL.pdf
  
  FACDL PRESS RELEASE FROM JUSTICE BUILDING BLOG:
  
  http://www.justicebuilding.blogspot.com/
  
  PRESS RELEASE
  Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
  
  FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:NEW PUBLIC DEFENDER SYSTEM DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL
  
  Criminal Defense Lawyers Win Suit Against Governor and Legislators. TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (December 21, 2007)
  
  Only one day after hearing legal arguments on the issue, Circuit Judge P. Kevin Davey issued a comprehensive opinion yesterday striking down Florida Law 2007-62. The law was passed in July in an attempt to create new, state-run conflict public defender offices in five regions throughout Florida to handle criminal cases from which the elected Public Defender was obligated to withdraw due to ethical conflict. In his opinion, Davey declared the law to be, “...an attempt to amend the [Florida] Constitution by legislative fiat.”
  
  “FACDL will also immediately begin contacting the Chief Judges of each Circuit to ensure that no person currently facing charges is adversely affected by the unconstitutionality of SB 1088.”
  
• 12/22/2007 9:17 AM Sonya Rudenstine wrote:
  This statements is wholly devoid of conscience and I find it unbelievable. Most attorneys at least give lip service to the importance of providing adequate services for the poor - not only do you seem to believe that the worse the lawyers are who represent the poor the better, you seem to be driven not by simple disregard of the downtrodden, but by the fact that you can actually get RICHER when the state offers substandard attorneys for the poor.
  
  You have just dramatically insulted the very "hack" who put this law to a halt and got you the fees you feel you so richly deserve. I work for the poor. That is all I do. I went to Stanford University and NYU School of Law. I make $30,000 a year because I do work I believe in, work that is absolutely necessary to insure that we have a humane and fair society. We, in the legal profession, have far more money than we need - where has our civility and generosity gone? No wonder people hate lawyers.
  
• 12/22/2007 9:41 AM Anonymous wrote:
  I'm glad that your $30,000.00 salary leaves you with "far more money than [you] need."
  
  I guess someone else was paying for that Standford undergrad degree and NYU School of Law Degree. I am glad that you have the familial wealth or separate independent wealth to devote yourself to work that is "absolutely necessary to insure that we have a human and fair society." I for one agree that the representation of the indigent is a noble and worthwhile profession.
  
  I also went to similar-level schools of equal expense -- I worked through both, took out significant six figure loans, and have been lucky enough to be able to pay them back (working on the last $2500 now).
  
  I also dedicated myself to the representation of the poor when I graduated from law school, and still provide pro bono work on a regular basis. However, as I have a family to support and no other means of doing it besides utilizing the degrees that cost me approximtely $250,000.00 to obtain, I will not for one minute apologize for EARNING a six figure income or the charging of a reasonable fee for services.
  
  I similarly will not disparage attorneys for what they charge or the fact that they have the ability to do so because of those attorneys who earn their living from court appointments.
  
  While 625's comments may be crass or inartful, they are accurate in the capitalistic society we find ourselves in. Whether you like it or not, the fact that there are many attorneys who make their living off court appointments (criminal, probate, or otherwise) leaves fewer attorneys competing for clients, allowing those who are looking for private work to charge market rates.
  
  There are folks out there spending hundreds of thousands of dollars a year marketing their services, paying a support staff, rent/mortgage on an office, etc. They spend thousands of hours a year working, and have earned the right to make more than $10-15 an hour doing it.
  
  And to respond to your comment about why people hate lawyers....Many people dislike our profession because some of us come off as snobby and elitist.
  
• 12/22/2007 9:44 AM Anonymous wrote:
  Wow...I didn't realize the real estate market in Gainseville was so far more depressed than ours in Broward County that $30k a year will support a law practice and private life.
  
  Or maybe we shouldn't pay all that much attention to the life-philosophy of an attorney who has been practicing and "earning a living" in our profession for about 3 years.
  
• 12/22/2007 11:50 AM Anonymous wrote:
  Thank you Professor Rudenstine for your comments. I am glad you believe you had the qualifications to critique how others engage in their business of practicing law.
  
  Given that you appear to have gone from being a Judicial Clerk to representing the indigent to academia, and from what I have seen, never had the need to run a private practice, your criticism rings hollow.
  
  But then again, you must be the best at what you do to come down so hard on others. Oh wait, here are the comments about the classes you teach at the FLORIDA COASTAL SCHOOL OF LAW (is that even accredited??). These comments are apparently from YOUR STUDENTS who you tought in 2006 from the website "ratemyprofessor.com".
  
  
  
  VERY POOR JOB COVERING MATERIAL. BORING LECTURES AND FINAL WAS OUT OF CONTEXT AND DIFFICULT.
  
  7/24/06 I was really looking forward to this class, but she made it the worst experience possible. She is RUDE, has a terrible temperment, treats students like trash, her exams are totally crazy with what she tests on. I paid for 2 classes to watch Dead Man Walking..most expense movie I've ever seen. Avoid her like the plague!
  
  6/20/06 Pre-Trial Draft Outrageous attendance policy. You miss a class, you fail. Graded and would mistake style for substance. If it's not exactly what she wants, it's wrong. Forget the fact that all the top attys in town draft their pleadings the same way.
  4/29/06 CRIM LAW HORRIBLE WOMAN! BAD TEACHER! Not a good combination...serious mood swing problems, probably on prozac...will test you on something she said once in class.
  
• 12/22/2007 12:08 PM Anonymous wrote:
  Sonya (a joke I'm certain),
  "This statements" you made must be intended as a joke because on his worst day, Spock's bowel movements would be more logical than your contentions.
  
  I actually went to NYU and remember you trying to make love to a parking meter.
  
• 12/22/2007 3:11 PM Anonymous wrote:
  Sonya, I don't appologize for doing well. I do pro bono work. Probably a little too much. I don't appologize for making a good amount of money. I work damn hard for it. I do tend to look down on the unmotivated who need government assistance to support their otherwise floundering practice. I have a family to take care of. Once I have 2 or 3 million in the bank, have all of my children's college paid for, my house paid off, my student loans paid off, paid off my 2 newphews college(they live with me due to parental drug problems), insured proper continuing medical treatment for two other poor relatives, then I can go and work for peanuts.
  
  I was not born poor. I came from a middle class family. ALL of my extended family lives in poverty. When you are born at the top of the ladder, you can afford to fight the good fight for basically nothing. That is fine and I hope that some day I put my children in that position. Right now, as for me, I have too many people depending on me. I can not afford that luxury.
  
  I should also say that working at the PD's is a noble cause. Starting a private law firm and living exclusively off goverment subsidies is not.
  
• 12/22/2007 6:26 PM Sonya Rudenstine wrote:
  You're all right on some level - what I said sounded elitist and snobby. I do have the luxury of being able to do the work I want to do. I did not intend to suggest that everyone has some obligation to earn $30,000, but here's the quote I attacked:
  "Keeping the tallentless on the wheel keeps us charging more money. The more wheel hacks there are, the more money we make. . . .When the tallentless no longer have a place to make a living, they are going to flood the private paying market offering to handle DUI's and DV's for $1,500 a pop."
  
  So, was I wrong to accuse the author of generalizing about people who represent the poor as "talentless" and suggesting that the more substandard people we can get to do court-appointed work, the better off s/he will be financially? I'm not sure there's any other way to read the comment, and I do think it's sad that anyone would wish that on the poor for his or her own gain, no matter how much pro bono work s/he may do on the side. I do admit that my attack was broader than that, though, b/c as a member of the "talentless," I got defensive. I think capitalism is fine and I didn't wish to suggest I was better than anyone else - just that I'm as good as anyone else, despite my chosen path.
  
  It's the holiday season...I sincerely wish you all a relaxing and peaceful week.
  
• 12/23/2007 10:14 AM Stephen Stanfield wrote:
  Sonya Rudenstine is like all the rest of us--a flawed human being. Having said that, I am glad to know her and very thankful that she is as dedicated as she to her chosen field. She is a credit to her profession and I write without a doubt that she was instrumental in Judge Davey's issuance of the Writ of Quo Warranto. She, along with Todd Doss, volunteered to litigate the issue on behalf of the FACDL.
  
  We of the Eighth Judicial Circuit Chapter of the FACDL are proud to claim her as our own.
  
• 12/23/2007 10:33 AM Anonymous wrote:
  Thanks Stephen for that (Yawn) comment. And now, back to crap happening in Broward.
  
  Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
  
• 12/23/2007 4:39 PM Anonymous wrote:
  I'll just say, that I thank you for keeping the wheel alive and well. You have your reasons, I have mine. I will continue to represent poor individuals for free out of my love for all people, not for any financial gain. Once I have taken care of all of my obligations, which are many, I will retire from private practice and go volunteer for legal aid in the area that my family is from.
  
• 12/23/2007 10:20 PM L. Benson wrote:
  Well, Dorothy--you're not in Kansas any more--This is Florida--The Rules are different here--Canons of whtics don't REALLY apply; rules of Court don't REALLY apply; The oath to the FLorida Bar doesn't REALLY apply--lawyers have "livings to make;" families to support;" and lots of other reasons "why not" did you ever stop t think that many of Broward's lawyers didn't got to such mountaains of learning and don't really give a damn? I've talked to too may of them andhtey really don't care--not even enough to put their names on thier BS--See, if enough people actually identified themselves, they couldn't prosecute them all--in unity there is strength and may even be recognition of a real problem--rioters learned this a long time ago. The bigger tha mass, the less it's enforced--I think Arlo guthrie said taht in Alice's Restaurant--enough people make it a movement--The Broward Judicial Corruption Massacree Movement--and just think--most of these "hacks" are members of the 60's love generation and values generation of caring. It just doesn't pay as much to really believe in and follow their oaths.
  
• 12/23/2007 10:42 PM Dear Former Vice Prez Nominee wrote:
  1)Do you know the words to Alice's Restaurant on cue? 2)Are you still mad at Quayle? 3)What floats in water?
  
  Aren't things really tough all over across Broward, aside from the judiciary? I'm talking the endless lines of strip malls, the utter lack of culture, the horrible driving, the hurricanes, the dyslectic shape of the courthouse, the per capita tonnage of hair supply products, the crime, the non crimes that are prosecuted, and the problems of pythons in the Everglades. Oh, and the lack of one good deli in Fort Lauderdale.
  
  I ask you Former Mr. Vice Presidential Nominee: You are what we need to spin the political yarn. Return Broward to the glory years of cow pastures, cow patties, and urge cessation from the Union.
  
• 12/24/2007 11:44 AM Anonymous wrote:
  Hey billie looks like the conflict counsel office is gone....maybe you spoke to soon gleefully laughing at all the people who would have lost business . where was conway aka conjob on this issue? all of us in dependency court know he has no private clients and uses his appointed clients to generate pub for himself
  
• 12/25/2007 10:01 PM Schwartzreich... wrote:
  ...is a balloon with a tub of fat for a head! WTF!!! Dude get those arteries checked.
  
• 12/30/2007 10:45 PM L. Benson wrote:
  That's where politically connected fraudulent lawyer hacks like Gerry Cunningham come in--take any money and sell out his clients by assistinf the prosecution is convicting his clients and then have the beneficiary of his errors then protected by Scott Raft and the State Atty's office wo defends him and lies to him on postconviction ans colludes with judicial sluts like Ana Gardiner to assist eher in violating the 3.850 Rules and deliberately delay theese motions and gets Ana to state in court that she will only sdo what the Prosecutor Scott Raft wants her to do and then the JQC delares that stating this guarantee of bias does not violate the very Canon of Ethics that specifiacally states that a judge violates this and several other Canons when she makes a public statement declaring her bias and intent to be biased. What a remarkable manipulation and control.
  
  Then they call this access to the courts and claim that the issue therefore had an appeal while ignoring whether it was a valid, fair and impartial appeal, and it is therefore the appellants fault that the judge rufused to do her lawful duty and expect everybody to buy it, and then absolutely lies in her denials or ineffective assistance of counsel claims so Gerry Cunningham and similar "tallentless hacks" who actually deliberately sabotage theri clients to assist the state in convictions never get exposed as ineffective and are gladly given more and more cases to blow as a reward for cheating their clients.
  
  So I can see the pride in profession you exhibit by being able to drive up your fees while still being another of the gutless snipes who won't mantion his or her name to advertise their allegedly better services and drum up some clients.
  
• 1/8/2008 6:55 AM Anonymous wrote:
  Any more info
  

Leave a comment

Comments are closed.