Come for the Tax Break, Stay for the Courts?
If you've had experience with our court system, I'd bet you a cafecito that a major sticking point to achieving a utopian vision of a true business haven is our literally and figuratively crumbling judicial infrastructure.
January 15, 2020 at 09:55 AM
5 minute read
With our beautiful weather, international access and great tax environment, why isn't South Florida a genuinely optimal jurisdiction for a mature business? If you've had experience with our court system, I'd bet you a cafecito that a major sticking point to achieving a utopian vision of a true business haven is our literally and figuratively crumbling judicial infrastructure.
Recent surveys of the South Florida judicial landscape have not painted a pretty picture. In a recent, widely publicized "2019 Lawsuit Climate Survey: Ranking the States," released by the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, Miami was ranked as having one of the worst legal climates for businesses in the United States, ranked 46th in the nation. For those of us who practice in these courts every day, it is not hard to see why. On the state level, we have an underfunded and overworked judiciary. There are too many cases and too few judges. The judges we do have are underpaid and drowning in their massive caseload. From 2016 through 2018, there were more than half a million civil lawsuits filed in the state of Florida. In 2017 to 2018, over 180,000 new civil lawsuits were filed, with more than 40% filed in Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach counties. To handle the 180,000 new lawsuits, South Florida relies on the 52 circuit civil judges currently presiding, roughly equating to 3,500 new cases per judge, per year. The number of judges appointed to handle this massive caseload has not measurably increased and legislative appropriations to state courts have been relatively flat (despite the fact that these courts generate hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue for the state in filing fees). A trial judge in South Florida is paid as much as one in north Florida, although the cost of living and caseload disparity is significant. The nearly 100-year-old Miami-Dade courthouse is literally falling apart, a problem our community has finally taken the first step in rectifying by approving its construction a few weeks ago.
And while a new courthouse is an important step, our politicians need to address the bigger problems: we need more judges and we need to reward them for their commitment to public service by paying them appropriately. Attracting high-quality attorneys to become judges is a lot harder when a judgeship means a 50% pay cut (while spending hundreds of hours every election cycle fundraising and campaigning). We can't be surprised in this current environment when some of our strongest judges leave the bench to become private mediators at $500 or more an hour.
One would think that our politicians would be motivated to prioritize improving the guts of our judicial system. Local legislators are pulling out all of the stops to attract new business to South Florida, which has become measurably easier due to our favorable tax environment. A few months ago, national publications reported the inroads Miami's Downtown Development Authority has been making to lure Chicago business to South Florida in response to Illinois' increased taxes. Carl Icahn is moving his $9 billion dollar hedge fund from New York to Miami next year. There has been a 95% increase in SEC registered investment advisers in South Florida between 2014 and 2018, and more than 70 financial services companies have moved to Palm Beach County in the past three years. While this makes the area an ideal professional hub, local business leaders and politicians will need to pay more attention to the state of our courts to ensure continued growth. As the number of businesses in the area grows, so will the number of disputes.
If our friends in Tallahassee cared about attracting more business to the state, they would pay more attention to what happens when businesses fight. Clients and attorneys are understandably frustrated when it takes five years to get a trial date or four months to get a 30-minute hearing before a judge. Most of our judges operate without law clerks, yet are expected to digest mountains of paper every day while resolving nine-digit dollar disputes among sophisticated businesses. Our judicial infrastructure will need to expand in order to service growing legal business needs in the area. If companies are unhappy with the local judicial system, their infatuation with the tax relief may be short-lived. There is no reason why Florida should routinely rate as a "judicial hellhole." We have the talent on the bench. We have the resources in the government. These new businesses we've worked so hard to attract may be in for a rude awakening if our legislators don't start prioritizing—now—a healthy future for our courts and judges.
Etan Mark is co-founder of Florida boutique litigation law firm Mark Migdal & Hayden. A commercial litigator, he serves clients in multiple jurisdictions involved in complex business disputes. His clients include public and private companies, real estate developers, investors and owners, tech entrepreneurs, gaming operators, family offices, hotels and banks.
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 AllLeveraging the Power of Local Chambers of Commerce: A Second-Career Lawyer’s Guide to Building a Thriving Practice
5 minute readCFPB Proposes Rule to Regulate Data Brokers Selling Sensitive Information
5 minute readEssential Labor Shifts: Navigating Noncompetes, Workplace Politics and the AI Revolution
Trending Stories
- 1Relaxing Penalties on Discovery Noncompliance Allows Criminal Cases to Get Decided on Merit
- 2Reviewing Judge Merchan's Unconditional Discharge
- 3With New Civil Jury Selection Rule, Litigants Should Carefully Weigh Waiver Risks
- 4Young Lawyers Become Old(er) Lawyers
- 5Caught In the In Between: A Legal Roadmap for the Sandwich Generation
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