There are so many screwball things happening across this state…one thing that the whole statewide Florida Foreclosure Fiasco has exposed is that our courts are just no equipped to deal with the cases that are pending before them.
The response has been a process that is deficient in many vital areas. In many cases, these deficient procedures are going to cause the properties that were subject to foreclosure to be unmarketable forever. There are still other cases that are languishing in a state of suspended reality….a sort of legal purgatory with no bottom or top….no end, no resolution.
The following order is an example of one such circumstance. Note that there is no rule cited which authorizes the proposed action taken in this case and that’s because….there is no rule that authorizes such an Order. And if there is no rule that authorizes, exactly what are the procedures that apply to such a non-authorized action? And how do litigants in a case respond to orders and procedures which have no rules?
This really is unprecedented and it’s impossible to predict where all this will go…..but in times of such chaos it’s hard to believe it will be anything but bad…..
I had one two.
I moved to strike Plaintiff’s legally deficient motion for SJ.
At that point I believe there was ex-parte communication between Shapiro&Fishman and judge.
Result, Plaintiff canceled SJ hearing and an IDENTICAL order was issued. (Marion County)
Obviously they are sharing this jem around.
Since I had other things to do, I let the order lay. Plaintiff has NOT paid reopening fee, continued to file new replacement affidavits and just this week I recieved a notice for SJ hearing.
Now considering a motion for clarification of the order, to strike Plaintiffs filings during the “Administrativly Closed” action and for sanctions in setting a hearing in a closed action.
Interestingly the clerk’s docket sheet showed case closed in December but re-opened when Plaintiff filed new documents, but NO reopening fee was paid by Plaintiff as called for in the order.
I think the only way to respond to violation of a twilight order is to wait for Plaintiff to continue the action then do a little creative twilight sanctions, for violating the intent of the order.
This puts Plaintiff in position of admitting it violated an order of the court, OR in the position of arguing with the court that the order is invalid. I would rather they argue that the courts orders are invalid than I do it.
Administratively close appears to be – we will put this on hold until the Plaintiff get’s their act together.
Here is a conundrum: If a case is administratively closed, can it later be dismissed for lack of prosecution or can a party say the order of closure prevented them from proceeding so the 10 month rule for starting the process to have the case dismissed for lack of prosecution was tolled ?
How come reopening is only a Plaintiff prerogative.
If a defendant violates the Amdin closure by filing documents or setting a depo or hearing, are they in violation of the order?
NOTE: When this happened to me I did some research on cases suspended by Administrative orders of closing. They are not new.
I found quite a few in Federal court, where one case is put on ice while the outcome of another case that affects the issues or rights to parties in the instant case is heard or settled.
But as you point out, like you, I can find no provision for them in FL. R. Civ. P.
see my post from last night about a similar issue just out of the 2nd yesterday