DOJ Weighs in on Florida Bar's Battle with Traffic Ticket Startup Tikd
Justice Department antitrust attorneys wrote to support Tikd, arguing the bar is incorrectly claiming immunity from lawsuit as a state actor.
March 15, 2018 at 12:09 PM
3 minute read
The U.S. Department of Justice is supporting a South Florida startup's antitrust lawsuit against the state bar, adding its voice to a growing debate over how the bar views legal tech companies.
The Justice Department's Antitrust Division wrote in support of Tikd, a Coral Gables-based company that contracts attorneys to fight minor traffic tickets for drivers who submit them via a smartphone platform. Main Justice's statement of interest Monday said the Florida Bar is incorrectly claiming immunity from the lawsuit as an arm of the state's judicial branch.
The statement of interest was filed by Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Andrew Finch, and antitrust attorneys Kristen Limarzi, Robert Nicholson and Steven Mintz.
The filing also took a broad view of the battle between Tikd and the bar, which has captured the attention of attorneys as technology companies run by nonlawyers move into the traditional realm of law firms.
“To be sure, new and innovative mobile device apps can be disruptive,” the Justice Department wrote. “Business models entrenched for decades have witnessed new competition from mobile platforms that can profoundly change an industry. But almost invariably, the winners from the process of innovation and competition are consumers.”
The Tikd tiff arose after the 30-year-old Florida law firm The Ticket Clinic objected to the startup's business model, including its promise to pay fines in any cases it loses, which attorneys are not allowed to do. After an investigation, the Florida Bar brought litigation against Tikd for the unlicensed practice of law.
That case is pending before the Florida Supreme Court. In the meantime, Tikd sued the bar and the Ticket Clinic in Miami federal court for antitrust violations, alleging they conspired to drive Tikd out of business.
The bar argues it should be dismissed from the case because of state-action immunity. The Justice Department said that position is contrary to the U.S. Supreme Court's 2015 ruling in North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission. The justices laid out factors required for immunity to apply, which DOJ said would have to be scrutinized later in the case, not at the motion to dismiss stage.
Tikd said it did not ask the Justice Department to take a position on the case, and the startup's attorney Pete Kennedy was surprised to hear from the government.
“This is a big deal,” Kennedy, a shareholder at Graves Dougherty Hearon & Moody in Austin, Texas, said in a statement. “The federal government rarely joins a lawsuit to support one side over the other. I am very pleased to see that the DOJ's Antitrust Division recognizes the significance of this lawsuit and supports Tikd's efforts to increase competition, reduce prices, and improve access to legal services for consumers.”
The Florida Bar declined to comment.
The case is before U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke in Miami.
Read the Justice Department's statement of interest below:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllVedder Price Shareholder Javier Lopez Appointed to Miami Planning, Zoning & Appeals Board
2 minute readCrypto Entrepreneur Claims Justice Department’s Software Crackdown Violates US Constitution
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Reviewing Judge Merchan's Unconditional Discharge
- 2With New Civil Jury Selection Rule, Litigants Should Carefully Weigh Waiver Risks
- 3Young Lawyers Become Old(er) Lawyers
- 4Caught In the In Between: A Legal Roadmap for the Sandwich Generation
- 5Top 10 Developments, Lessons, and Reminders of 2024
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250