Fla. Supreme Court for 2nd Time Rejects Proposed Discipline for Miami-Dade Judge
In a 5-2 decision on Friday, the Florida Supreme Court said no to the latest sanctions proposed by the Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) and Miami-Dade County Court Judge Maria Ortiz, charged with violating the judicial code of conduct by accepting free hotel stays with her husband, a government official who allegedly took them as bribes.
December 07, 2018 at 04:50 PM
3 minute read
The Florida Supreme Court has, for the second time, rejected the stipulated discipline for Miami-Dade County Court Judge Maria D. Ortiz, who was accused of accepting free hotel stays with her husband, Mariano Fernandez, former director of Miami Beach's building department, who allegedly took them as bribes.
The Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) charged Ortiz with ethics violations in May, while her husband lost his job and faces corruption charges.
In June, the justices rejected Ortiz's first stipulation agreement, in which the JQC had recommended a public reprimand and $5,000 fine.
The JQC went back to the drawing board Oct. 29, filing a revised stipulation. In it, Ortiz agreed to cover the JQC's court costs and serve a 30-day suspension without pay, in addition to the fine and public reprimand, Ortiz also admitted that she failed to “take reasonable steps” or “make specific inquiry” about how the trips were paid for.
At a recent evidentiary hearing, Ortiz claimed she rarely checked her financial statements and receipts because her husband Fernandez took care of their joint account.
“I never worried about amounts. I always lived very frugally. That was the way it was,” Ortiz said at the hearing.
Ortiz's lawyer, David B. Rothman of Rothman & Associates in Miami, would not comment on the case.
In the revised stipulation, the JQC maintained that it believed Ortiz was negligent but conceded in its response that despite Fernandez's alleged criminal conduct, it would likely be unable to prove the judge intentionally violated the judicial canons.
JQC attorney Alex Williams declined to comment.
Justices Barbara Pariente, R. Fred Lewis, Peggy Quince, Ricky Polston and Jorge Labarga stood by the decision, which suggested a longer, 90-day suspension. But Justice Alan Lawson dissented, saying he would accept the stipulation agreed by Ortiz and the JQC. Chief Justice Charles T. Canady joined in Lawson's dissent.
The 5-2 decision sent the case back to the JQC for reconsideration. If no agreement is reached, the Hearing Panel of the Commission will hold a final hearing and send a recommendation to the high court, which will make its own decision.
|Read the court order:
Related stories:
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 All'Final Countdown': SEC Launches Nearly 800% Litigation Surge in October
3 minute readSt. Thomas University Settles With Fired Professor Who Had Alleged Academic Freedom Violations and Discrimination
9 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Steward Health CEO Saga Signals Escalation of Coercive Congressional Oversight Against Private Parties
- 2'They Should Have Tried to Negotiate': Jury Finds Against Insurer
- 3Expert Testimony Regarding Sexual Grooming
- 4Actions Speak Louder Than Words: Law Firms Shrink From 'Performative' Statements
- 5Legaltech Rundown: DeepL Launches AI Translator, BigHand Upgrades Intelligence Software, and More
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