Hi folks, sorry I’m late but it’s hard to blog and take a deposition (though I’m getting better at it).
Onward to the bunker, where once again we get to learn
life legal lessons courtesy of the most fabulous denizens of the most fabulous bunker in all the most fabulous of lands (hey, I may someday run for political office).
From the darkest recesses of the deepest crevices — at a purely arbitrary date and time — written utterances will erupt full force into the atmosphere, like Old Faithful, to the great delight and occasional dismay of the adoring schleppers who keep begging for more:
Jurasek v. Jurasek:
News travels slow in the divorce bar — they’re still getting used to Palm Pilots just as tech-savvy lawyers are dazzling clients with an obscure, little known device put out by a scrappy upstart and known only to the select few as “iPad” (did I spell that right)?
Anyways, they still think it’s 2007 down there:
We agree with the wife that the trial court erred and abused its discretion in awarding the husband a “special equity” in the parties’ jointly owned marital residence. The husband contends that he has greater entitlement to the parties’ jointly titled home based on his investment of his share of his inheritance fund in the marital home. This argument is insufficient as a matter of law. “Special equity” was abolished in 2008 and was replaced by the term, “a claim for unequal distribution” of marital property. See § 61.075 (11) Fla. Stat. (2008).
Once again political correctness has killed a perfectly fine phrase!
Regions v. Mercenari:
Surprise — Judge Adrien affirmed on appeal!
But not according to Judge Shepherd’s serendipitous dissent:
The only connection this case has to Miami-Dade County is the serendipitous fact the plaintiffs live in Miami-Dade County. While the plaintiffs choice of venue is an important consideration, the trial court must balance this choice with the convenience of all the parties and witnesses.
But that’s a pretty big serendipitous connection, no? No:
All of the activity relating to this case occurred in Bay County, Florida. Both the purchase and termination agreements were signed there, and all the activity relating to the escrow agreements occurred there. All of the defendants’ witnesses are located in Bay County.
For good measure Judge Shepherd pulls out and bolds some language from Kinney. Ouch.
But whatever happened to the vaulted and much-praised-while-holding-your-nose “abuse of discretion” standard?