RIP: BRANNON v. FINKELSTEIN

A federal judge has issued an Order Granting Summary Judgment in Michael Brannon's litigation against Public Defender Howard Finkelstein.  Whether all the proceedings are dead will be determined after one of our Pacer familiar friends forwards us the Finkelstein-friendly Order for posting later today ...

ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGEMENT

 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments
Page: 1 of 4
  • 10/17/2012 12:01 PM NYC Comedian wrote:
    That joint account with Mom has my dough in it bro. NYC comedian does not fund that funny bro. Watch your step bro
    Reply to this
  • 10/17/2012 12:49 PM Anonymous wrote:
    Howard can't be beaten at the polls, can't be knocked off the air and can't be sued over spilt milk. There must be a lot of unhappy faces in Mudville today.
    Reply to this
  • 10/17/2012 1:45 PM not quite wrote:
    Maybe Howard himself cannot be beaten at the polls but he has no impact on other races, he worked hard against Ross and Satz and they did exceedingly well in the August primary.

    All good Howie, it will be a different ball game when you run your boy Gordon Weeks to succeed you.
    Reply to this
  • 10/17/2012 2:57 PM Anonymous wrote:
    I think Sheila Alu vs Satzie 2012?
    Reply to this
  • 10/17/2012 4:01 PM Anonymous wrote:
    Hmmm?
    Reply to this
  • 10/17/2012 4:14 PM Anonymous wrote:
    I see Buddy Nevins still reads your Jaablog:
    http://www.browardbeat.com/help-me-howard-wins-free-speech-case/
    Reply to this
  • 10/17/2012 5:26 PM NO RETURN wrote:
    Another courthouse bully bites the dust for good and deservedly so! So long Lit'l Red. You led the charge for your masters and u got just what was coming to you. Wrong action = No return.
    Reply to this
  • 10/17/2012 5:35 PM take two aspirin wrote:
    I always thought the guy was a whack job. Now (he) knows it too. Doctor cure thyself. Take two aspirin and sleep it off. The pic on Nevin's blog tells it all.
    Reply to this
  • 10/17/2012 5:44 PM Anonymous wrote:
    Just one less annoying twit to deal with. No great loss.
    Reply to this
  • 10/17/2012 6:42 PM Anonymous wrote:
    NOT SO TOUGH NOW RED. TRY A NEW ENERGY DRINK.
    Reply to this
  • 10/17/2012 7:07 PM toast wrote:
    I could have told Brannon that bird was never going to fly.
    Reply to this
  • 10/17/2012 9:16 PM Anonymous wrote:
    I think Judge Graham got this wrong. He is probably the most reversed judge in the Southern District. I think Brannon had enough evidence of Howard's personal dislike for him to get the case to a jury. It would have been a tough case to win, but I don't see how the court can say that as a matter of law no reasonable jury could have found for Brannon. Lets face it, everyone reading this blog knows that Howard hated Brannon and made it his mission to freeze him out. You may say 'good for Howard he was right to do it" but that doesn't mean that Howard didn't retaliate against Brannon.
    Reply to this
  • 10/18/2012 7:38 AM Anonymous wrote:
    Brannon's misplaced sense of entitlement and grandiose sense of self-importance doomed him to failure from the beginning of this frivolous endeavor. That and what I always thought was a Narcissistic personality headed for the rocks.
    Reply to this
  • 10/18/2012 8:26 AM Anonymous wrote:
    Don't know whose advice he was following but it was obvious the wrong advice. He was never any Sigmund Freud. Broward sure has it's share of hacks.
    Reply to this
  • 10/18/2012 8:53 AM Anonymous wrote:
    I guess he thought he would go to the mat with a bang. More like a whimper.
    Reply to this
  • 10/18/2012 8:59 AM CIVIL CASE CLOSED wrote:
    JUDGE GRAHAM NAILED THIS ONE SHUT CORRECTLY RIGHT ON THE HEAD. THANKS FOR THE INFO. "CIVIL CASE CLOSED". DR. BRANNON HAS BEEN RUBBER STAMPED.
    Reply to this
  • 10/18/2012 11:44 AM Anonymous wrote:
    Is there anyone over there in that courthouse with a JD that's ego isn't so big they cant stand an intelligent person. Notwithstanding the first amendment right issue, to me it seems more like slander, you can hear from outside the coutroom when an intelligent person that knows forensic psy. requests Dr. Brannon, the PD's officer spins their heads and spews NOOOOOOOOOOOOO Dr. Brannon, now come on who's the narcissist??????
    Reply to this
  • 10/18/2012 11:52 AM Anonymous wrote:
    No, Dr. Brannon not much for psychoanalytic therapy, but he certainly knows forensics, testing competency and all matters he was usually retained on. So, he was bit and bit back, there is only so many times you can kick the dog before he bites, if there was no malfeasance wouldn't the other doctor that was also hired almost equally as much been cut due to letting the "new young blood in?"
    Reply to this
  • 10/18/2012 1:37 PM Waste our money wrote:
    90 year old man Satz bets on the wrong horse again
    Reply to this
  • 10/18/2012 3:49 PM entitled to what wrote:
    What entitled Brannon to think he had any right to expect business to remain the same forever coming from the state of fla.? I mean, hadn't he made enough off the court system to begin with? Whoever heard of a psychologist making that much anyway for as many years as he did and expecting it would always be forthcoming and then suing when he didn't get what he felt he's entitled to? Screw that.
    Brannon was no better than any other psychologist and wasn't my favorite by a long shot. I think his arrogance got the better of him in the long run.
    He can set up his makeshift couch and preach his crap like all the rest of them now. No big deal.
    Can't feel sorry for anybody that thinks he's infallible and therefore entitled, especially when they spew the kind of junk he did.
    Just my opinion, but always thought he was full of it like most of them. Maybe the worst.
    Reply to this
  • 10/18/2012 8:07 PM Shrink too wrote:
    Hmmm. you seem yourself a little angry at the entire field of psychology, is your little office with your makeshift scales of justice any better, did the JD become more revered than a Psy.D. was Brannon that good that he caused you so much strife that in turn you had to go after the entire field of psychology.??? Maybe the respondent can teach you a thing or two about resentments!!!! Lighten up Shark, lately what is witnessed over there the field should be called liars not lawyers....grow up jealous bastard...he stood up for himself, his practice and his partner and family in other parts of the world, hes a hero!!!
    Reply to this
  • 10/18/2012 8:34 PM Anonymous wrote:
    I'm still astounded by the flagrant arrogance of Brannon's filing of the above lawsuit when taken in context of the allegations of his complaint and how he could have conceivably thought that this would not have created obstacles to his continued evaluations of Public Defender clients.
    I can only surmise that his arrogance blinded him to all other considerations in his decision to do so.
    His utter lack of appreciation for the work he had received in the past and his perception of the value he brought to our criminal justice system were completely eclipsed by his avaricious attitude towards keeping his practice fueled by whatever means he thought necessary.
    It is indeed unfortunate that he pursued a path whereby he apparently surmised he would obtain this end by filing such a suit to begin with. It was beyond poor judgment in my opinion in this light and calls into question other motivations.
    Reply to this
  • 10/18/2012 8:59 PM Anonymous wrote:
    Just the parting shot of a self absorbed pontificator that lost his head in the clouds. Storm clouds as it turned out. How many times do you have to see it happen?
    Reply to this
  • 10/18/2012 11:08 PM Anonymous wrote:
    Say what you will about Brannon, but Judges who read this blog, ask yourself this. If you can only select one psychologist to get it right in a major case, who do you select? Defense attorneys, ask yourself this. If you can only select one psychologist to testify in your case in front of a jury and get it right, who do you select? Assistant State Attorneys who read this blog, ask yourself this, if you can only select one psychologist to examine a defendant and give you an honest and objective answer, who do you select? Be honest boys and girls, same answer all three times. Get over it.
    Reply to this
  • 10/19/2012 7:46 AM Anonymous wrote:
    Trying to be too many things to too many people with what he thought was his best poker face and playing them all for everything they were worth amount to allot of political campaign contributions but diminishing returns in the end for a wrestler that thought he was Mohammad Ali but was really more like Alice in Wonderland.
    Reply to this
  • 10/19/2012 8:02 AM press blackout wrote:
    Interesting how the mainstream press hasn't picked up on this one or maybe why is a better question. I guess nobody is returning phone calls and just hoping it will go away while they hide under the table.
    Reply to this
  • 10/19/2012 8:22 AM jim wrote:
    What's the answer to the end of the gravy train? File a lawsuit and hope for the best! Typical Broward shenanigans.
    Reply to this
  • 10/19/2012 8:30 AM Anonymous wrote:
    HOGS GET SLAUGHTERED
    Reply to this
  • 10/19/2012 8:53 AM Anonymous wrote:
    BAD CALL FOR BRANNON
    Reply to this
  • 10/19/2012 7:54 PM Anonymous wrote:
    He had a long run. No reason to get greedy. This was a stupid exercise on his part.
    Reply to this
  • 10/19/2012 8:59 PM PRIDE wrote:
    NOTE TO BRANNON: PRIDE GOETH BEFORE THE FALL
    Reply to this
  • 10/19/2012 9:05 PM Appeals Here we come wrote:
    Whether Brannon was making too much dough and wether Finklestein was out to screw him are two very distinct issues.
    Was he making too much money? Well, that may depend how left wing you are. It seems that many on the left resent people who make more money than them (think P. D.'s office).
    Do we think that Finklestein wanted to screw him over his testimony regarding Aleman? You can't deny it without laughing. Please (email that Brannon will die by a thousand cuts).
    Reply to this
  • 10/20/2012 1:54 AM sour grapes wrote:
    Brannon has sounded like a broken record for years. His suit reminds me of former Judge Spechler's suit when that tool lost it with then CJ Tobin. Both suits were about as effective and both as poorly conceived. Brannon's just sounds a little more sour grapes to me.
    Reply to this
  • 10/20/2012 2:14 AM The Leak wrote:
    Does anyone know how did that email get exposed??
    Reply to this
  • 10/20/2012 9:13 AM Anonymous wrote:
    Man, he sure did make allot of money while the getting was good.
    Reply to this

Page: 1 of 4
Leave a comment

 Name

 Email (will not be published)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.