Ousted Sheriff Israel's Lawyer Says More Litigation Possible After Florida Senate Vote
Miami-based litigator Benedict Kuehne, who represents former Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel, is evaluating whether legal action will follow a vote by the Florida Senate to uphold Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis' removal of the ex-sheriff from office.
October 24, 2019 at 03:47 PM
3 minute read
The Miami-based litigator representing former Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel is evaluating whether more legal action will follow a vote by the Florida Senate to uphold Israel's ouster from office by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.
Benedict "Ben" Kuehne said Israel has authorized him to determine if the law enforcement officer's forced removal from his elected position constituted a violation of due process.
"If there is an actionable denial of due process that infringed the people's right to choose their sheriff by election, then there will be an opportunity for litigation, perhaps in the Florida Supreme Court or perhaps in federal court," the attorney said, adding a potential lawsuit "has to be more fully evaluated."
"If my research determines there is a significant case, I will make appropriate recommendations to the sheriff," Kuehne said.
The Florida Senate in a 25-15 vote Wednesday declined to reinstate Israel as Broward County sheriff. The senate's decision upheld Executive Order 19-14, the suspension order issued by DeSantis against Israel in January, and disregarded the recommendation of Florida Senate Special Master Dudley Goodlette to reinstate the ex-sheriff. Goodlette, an attorney and former member of the Florida House of Representatives, said DeSantis failed to substantiate his charges of negligence and incompetence against Israel.
The governor's executive order said the responses by the Broward Sheriff's Office to mass shootings at the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport and Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, in January 2017 and February 2018 respectively, demonstrated failed leadership on Israel's part.
Kuehne criticized the results of the vote, calling it a "totally political process" and "completely contrary" to the Florida Supreme Court's order regarding the hearing.
"The Florida Supreme Court has made clear that the process of senate review must be based on evidence and cannot be arbitrary," Kuehne said, adding DeSantis' senate allies "decided to change the rules, tilt the playing field and absolve the governor of any obligation under the Constitution to prove the case by evidence."
Israel's case against DeSantis landed before the Florida Senate after both the state's appellate and supreme courts ruled in favor of the governor, authorizing his ability to remove elected officials via decree.
Kuehne said a prospective case before the Florida Supreme Court would challenge what he calls the arbitrary nature of the senate's review process. The attorney cited State ex rel. Hardie v. Coleman, a 1934 Florida Supreme Court ruling that stressed the seriousness of stripping elected officials of their title.
"It says in its text that the process cannot be an arbitrary one; that means it can't be based on whim or conjecture, it has to be based on real evidence," Kuehne said.
Meanwhile, DeSantis thanked the Florida Senate for its decision.
"I felt this needed to be done and the majority in the Senate agreed," he said in a statement. "I hope the outcome provides some measure of relief to the Parkland families that have been doggedly pursuing accountability."
Israel has said he will campaign for the position of Broward County sheriff in the 2020 elections.
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 AllSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Courts of Appeal Conflicted Over Rule 1.442(c)(3) When Claims for Damages Involve a Husband and Wife
Families Settle Court Battle Over Who Owns Parkland Killer's Name, Likeness
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Phila. Jury Hits Sig Sauer With $11M Verdict Over Alleged Gun Defect
- 2Lost in the Legal Maze: How State Regulations Are Hindering Hemp Operators' Success
- 3New Associates Yearbook 2024
- 4Disbarred Attorney Alleges ADA Violations in Lawsuit Against Miami-Dade Judges
- 5Free Speech Causes a Neighborly Feud
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