Florida Bar Moves to Disqualify Former President from Antitrust Case
Ramon Abadin represents the startup Tikd, which is suing the bar for allegedly conspiring with the Ticket Clinic to drive Tikd out of business.
December 05, 2017 at 10:11 AM
9 minute read
The Florida Bar is moving to disqualify its former president Ramon Abadin from representing the startup Tikd in a case against the bar.
The bar argues that during his 2015-16 term, Abadin “was provided attorney-client and attorney work-product communications and advice about and involving the specific antitrust issues and allegations asserted in this action.”
Tikd is suing the bar and Florida law firm The Ticket Clinic for $11 million, alleging that the defendants are conspiring to drive the Coral Gables-based startup out of business. Tikd allows drivers to upload minor traffic tickets to an app, and then the company contracts nearby attorneys to fight the ticket in court.
A representative from the bar declined to comment on Tuesday.
Tikd did not exist during Abadin's term as bar president. But the bar argues that the Miami lawyer — soon to depart the shuttering firm Sedgwick — was privy as president-elect designate in 2014 to internal memos about legal issues relevant in Tikd's case.
In a motion to dismiss filed on Friday, the bar also argues it is immune from being sued in federal court because the bar is an arm of the Florida Supreme Court.
The U.S. Supreme Court decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission found the board did not have state action immunity because its decisions were final and not subject to review. The Florida Bar had joined in an amicus brief arguing state action immunity should apply.
Abadin's presidency was also marked by a roiling debate over reciprocity, which would have allowed out-of-state lawyers to practice in Florida without passing the state's bar exam. The measure was voted down, but it gained Abadin some adversaries, including Palm Beach Gardens attorney Lloyd Schwed of Schwed Kahle & Kress.
Schwed said he believes the reciprocity debate is linked Abadin's representation of Tikd.
“His goal for reciprocity was to allow technology companies and out-of-state lawyers to skirt the unlicensed practice of law requirements by essentially letting every lawyer in the country gain admission to the Florida Bar,” Schwed said. “His current lawsuit against the Florida Bar is a backdoor effort to defeat the bar's longstanding rules prohibiting the unlicensed practice of law in Florida.”
Abadin, whose presidency was also focused on encouraging lawyers to be aware of developments in technology, dismissed Schwed's comment.
“That's absurd,” he said, laughing. “Technology is changing the way everything happens in our world.”
Abadin declined to comment on the bar's motion, but Tikd founder and CEO Chris Riley called the disqualification motion “an extraordinary move.”
“It's ironic that the very institution charged with ensuring people have access to legal services chose to ask a judge to take all of mine away,” Riley said in a statement. “All we've wanted from the beginning is to sit down and talk and that's still true today. The bar is instead doing everything it can to draw attention to anything other than the merits of our business model and how it helps consumers and lawyers. I think it's pretty telling.”
The Florida Bar is moving to disqualify its former president Ramon Abadin from representing the startup Tikd in a case against the bar.
The bar argues that during his 2015-16 term, Abadin “was provided attorney-client and attorney work-product communications and advice about and involving the specific antitrust issues and allegations asserted in this action.”
Tikd is suing the bar and Florida law firm The Ticket Clinic for $11 million, alleging that the defendants are conspiring to drive the Coral Gables-based startup out of business. Tikd allows drivers to upload minor traffic tickets to an app, and then the company contracts nearby attorneys to fight the ticket in court.
A representative from the bar declined to comment on Tuesday.
Tikd did not exist during Abadin's term as bar president. But the bar argues that the Miami lawyer — soon to depart the shuttering firm Sedgwick — was privy as president-elect designate in 2014 to internal memos about legal issues relevant in Tikd's case.
In a motion to dismiss filed on Friday, the bar also argues it is immune from being sued in federal court because the bar is an arm of the Florida Supreme Court.
The U.S. Supreme Court decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission found the board did not have state action immunity because its decisions were final and not subject to review. The Florida Bar had joined in an amicus brief arguing state action immunity should apply.
Abadin's presidency was also marked by a roiling debate over reciprocity, which would have allowed out-of-state lawyers to practice in Florida without passing the state's bar exam. The measure was voted down, but it gained Abadin some adversaries, including Palm Beach Gardens attorney Lloyd Schwed of Schwed Kahle & Kress.
Schwed said he believes the reciprocity debate is linked Abadin's representation of Tikd.
“His goal for reciprocity was to allow technology companies and out-of-state lawyers to skirt the unlicensed practice of law requirements by essentially letting every lawyer in the country gain admission to the Florida Bar,” Schwed said. “His current lawsuit against the Florida Bar is a backdoor effort to defeat the bar's longstanding rules prohibiting the unlicensed practice of law in Florida.”
Abadin, whose presidency was also focused on encouraging lawyers to be aware of developments in technology, dismissed Schwed's comment.
“That's absurd,” he said, laughing. “Technology is changing the way everything happens in our world.”
Abadin declined to comment on the bar's motion, but Tikd founder and CEO Chris Riley called the disqualification motion “an extraordinary move.”
“It's ironic that the very institution charged with ensuring people have access to legal services chose to ask a judge to take all of mine away,” Riley said in a statement. “All we've wanted from the beginning is to sit down and talk and that's still true today. The bar is instead doing everything it can to draw attention to anything other than the merits of our business model and how it helps consumers and lawyers. I think it's pretty telling.”
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 AllAfter Miami Arrest, Top Real Estate Broker Brothers Facing Sex Crimes Charges
US Judge Throws Out Sale of Infowars to The Onion. But That's Not the End of the Road for Sandy Hook Families
4 minute read3 Incidents Lead to Charges Against the Alexander Brothers; Cousin Remains at Large
3 minute readAmid Growing Litigation Volume, Don't Expect UnitedHealthcare to Change Its Stripes After CEO's Killing
6 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