This article is incomplete as it presents as settled law several important principles allegedly based upon recent decisions of the Florida Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court which have either not yet been decided or are severely limited by the scope of the courts' actual holdings.
Several critical issues which are the ultimate focus of this article are being vigorously disputed and litigated in two separate cases I am handling and which are being litigated on the other side by Robert Quinn and his law firm Carlton Fields.
The first case plays a significant role in the article, Delta Property Management, Inc. v. Profile Investments, Inc., 875 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 2004), and is entering its seventh year of litigation in Duval County Circuit Court, wherein I along with co-counsel represent the plaintiff and Mr. Quinn and his firm represent one of the defendants. Another appeal dealing, inter alia, with the trial court's determination of the inapplicability of the Supreme Court's prior decision (discussed in note 17 of the article) is imminent. Another case also discussed in the text accompanying note 17 of the article, Luke Investments, Inc. v. Camelot Condominium Owners Association, Inc., (2d DCA Case No. 2D07-1682), is a case in which I, along with other counsel, represent the appellant Luke Investments, and Mr. Quinn and his law firm represent the appellee, Camelot Condominium Owners Association. Oral argument before the Second District is set for October 3, 2007.
The fact that Mr. Quinn and Carlton Fields, the author and his firm, have this obvious interest in these cases, and in the outcome of this area of law was not disclosed in the article. I find this completely unacceptable.
I cannot believe that the Journal does not accept responsibility for allowing what is tantamount to ex parte judicial lobbying to appear in its pages.
WILLIAM S. GRAESSLE, Jacksonville
Editor's Note: The author's and his law firm's involvement in litigation discussed in his article and the pendency of certain cases discussed therein, under applicable Journal policies, did not necessarily disqualify the piece from publication. However, through incomplete communication between the editorial staff and the author, this involvement was not known to or considered by the reviewing panel. More formal procedures are now in place so that a similar situation does not occur again. The Journal apologizes that these matters were not made known to our readership and hopes that all interested parties will make their own assessment of the issues raised by Mr. Graessle. Finally, the Journal has invited him to prepare a followup article in a future issue.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Author:||Graessle, William S.|
|Publication:||Florida Bar Journal|
|Article Type:||Letter to the editor|
|Date:||Oct 1, 2007|
|Previous Article:||Leveling the playing field: can Title VII work to increase minority coaching hires in NCAA athletics?|
|Next Article:||House Bill 7203: growth management reform - fixing the glitches, pipelining, streamlining, and other evolutional changes.|
|"To Be An Author": Letters of Charles W. Chesnutt, 1889-1905.|
|"Arsenic in food": opinion parading as science.|
|Sherwood Anderson; a writer in America; v.2.|
|Discovering Nature's Alphabet.|
|Letters to the editor.|