Election Rivalry Fuels Law Firm's Bid to Remove Judge
The move prompted claims Florida law firm used its deep pockets to strategically throw a sitting judge from its litigation.
April 20, 2018 at 12:38 PM
2 minute read
Cole Scott & Kissane, Florida's largest insurance defense firm, has filed 38 motions to disqualify Judge David C. Miller from it cases after one of its attorneys filed to run against him in the November general election.
The move has prompted claims the firm is using its deep pockets to strategically throw a sitting judge off its litigation by pitting one of its lawyers against him in the political arena. It also caused an uproar among plaintiff lawyers, who say they'd have to start over before new judges in dozens of cases if Cole Scott succeeds.
The firm filed 33 motions to disqualify Miller and five sua sponte recusal requests, which ask the judge to remove himself without a motion.
Cole Scott partner Elisabeth M. Espinosa filed on April 5 to challenge Miller for his seat in Division 8.
Now, questions are swirling about why Espinosa chose to run against a judge handling dozens of the firm's cases.
“We're the largest insurance defense firm in the state of Florida, so to have 30 cases in front of any judge is not surprising. That would be rather standard,” law firm managing partner Richard Cole said Friday. “I have no way to control where Ms. Espinosa runs for judge. … That's her decision.”
The firm's website listed Espinosa an associate earlier this month, but it now describes her as a partner. Cole said Espinosa became a nonequity partner “recently,” but “not this week,” and declined to elaborate.
Critics say Cole Scott & Kissane promoted Espinosa to bolster its bid for Miller's removal by arguing that a firm with a partner—not an associate— running against a judge would likely be a victim of unfair rulings.
“This has much broader implications. The motions for recusal have very little to do with the actions of Judge Miller,” said plaintiffs lawyer Victor M. Diaz Jr. “It's scary. It's an attack on the independence of the judiciary, and an attempt to intimidate state court judges that are subject to election or reelection. It should be offensive to every member of the bar, of concern to all lawyers and every sitting circuit court judge.”
This is a developing story and will be updated.
This content has been archived.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
© 2024 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 AllFlorida Supreme Court Paves Way for Attorney Fees Over $100k in Land Dispute
Miami’s Arbitration Week Aims To Cement City’s Status as Dispute Destination
3 minute readHit Song Ignites Multimillion-Dollar Legal Battle in South Florida
Ex-Big Law Attorney Disbarred for Defrauding $1 Million of Client Money
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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