Third District Court of Appeal Judge Bronwyn Miller. Photo: J. Albert DiazLetter to the Editor: Judges 'Are Entitled to Be Free of Harassment, Intimidation and Disparagement'
The president-elect of the Miami chapter of the American Board of Trial Advocates responds to an article accusing Third District Court of Appeal Judge Bronwyn Miller of "the appearance of judicial corruption."
April 28, 2020 at 01:22 PM
3 minute read
Third District Court of Appeal Judge Bronwyn Miller was accused of "the appearance of judicial corruption" in an article published April 23.
The accusations are that she knowingly withheld information that her husband had a partnership and thus a financial interest with one of the attorneys appearing in a case before her. A review of the court docket disproves the allegations against Judge Miller.
On Oct. 26, 2017, VME Group International v. Grand Condominium was filed. Judge Miller presided over the case for several months. On Dec. 21, 2018, Judge Miller denied a pending request for injunction filed by plaintiff and opposed by one of the defendants, Kalb.
On Aug. 9, 2019, eight months after she denied VME's request for injunction, Judge Miller's husband and the attorney who represented Kalb filed Marrache v. Bacardi USA in Miami-Dade Circuit Court. The Bacardi case was unrelated to the VME case except that a defendant in VME and the plaintiff in Marrache were represented by the same attorney.
Over eight months after the Bacardi case was filed, counsel for VME filed a motion to disqualify in the Third District, which accused Judge Miller of judicial misconduct for not disclosing at any time before her departure from the VME case that her husband had a financial relationship with counsel for one of the defendants.
The facts are the relationship complained of arose eight months after Judge Miller ceased being a judge in any form on the VME case.
The motion also alleged Judge Miller's husband had a separate financial relationship with Kalb's attorney in a different case, Harvard Financial Services v. Remy-Calixte, but a review of the court filings in that case reveal their clients' relationship was adverse to one another on the ultimate financial issues.
While motions to disqualify may be proper, judges who safeguard the fair administration of justice should never be impugned for carrying out their professional duties. The Miami chapter of the American Board of Trial Advocates believes that judges are entitled to be free of harassment, intimidation and disparagement.
When allegations such as these are made, it is necessary to a functioning system of justice that the true facts be made known to the public.
Deborah J. Gander
President-Elect
Miami chapter
ABOTA
|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
Divided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute read
Second 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
Trending Stories
- 1From 'Confusing Labyrinth' to Speeding 'Rollercoaster': Uncertainty Reigns in Title IX as Litigators Await Second Trump Admin
- 2Critical Mass With Law.com’s Amanda Bronstad: Why Jurors in California Failed to Reach Verdict Over Zantac, Bankruptcy Judge Tables Sanctions Against Beasley Allen Attorney
- 3Jones Day Client Seeks Indemnification for $7.2M Privacy Settlement, Plus Defense Costs
- 4Elections Have Consequences: Some Thoughts on Labor and Employment Law Topics in 2025 and Beyond
- 5Law Firm Associates, Staffers Continue to Put a Premium On Workplace Flexibility, Study Finds
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
