Legal Ethics Question of the Day:
If the Court Has Gone Down on You, Is Recusal Required?
We reiterate what we observed yesterday: "When it comes to generating ATL material, the University of Miami School of Law tops the rankings."
It appears that the undergraduate school at UM also sees its fair share of shenanigans. Check out this motion to recuse (PDF), which has been making the rounds by email. It involves one UM alumnus seeking the recusal of a former college classmate, now on the state bench.
Pro se plaintiff Robert Seitz asks Judge Mary Barzee Flores (at right), of Florida's Eleventh Judicial Circuit, to recuse herself from hearing his case. The grounds for recusal are, er, interesting. Here's what he alleges (alleges -- we've undertaken no independent investigation of his claims):
You can read the entire motion by clicking here (PDF).
Update: For Judge Barzee Flores's response to these allegations, in her ruling on the motion to recuse, click here.
Seitz v. Bareille: Motion to Recuse [PDF]
(92) Comments
FIRST
If nothing else, the over-the-top, fratboy-"I hit that"-style of recounting the events in question probably shames the judge more, and pushes her toward recusal, than a more sober and respectful version would have.
I was wondering how long it would take to hit ATL; I got this last week via email.
Check out this opinion, with an identically named defendant in the same geographic area, doing some similar stuff.
http://www.3dca.flcourts.org/Opinions/3d03-1628.pdf
This blows. He, he, he. I said blows.
you really can't blame him for filing the motion. it would be really awkward to have a client's interests left up to someone you drunkenly fooled around with in college. i'd do the same thing if i were in that lawyer's position.
still funny to see it verbalized, though.
Fellatiowned.
What's funny is that he expected her to remember they fooled around. Sounds like she was pretty loaded at the time.
US News needs a new factor to include it its set of rankings to include the "skank" factor: level of debauchery on campus
1:09, he was acting pro se.
Dont' taze me, blow
The Judge got her UM JD Cum Laude - obviously, Mr. Seitz got his undergrad degree Cum Lauder
Who screams while receiving a hummer?
This judge must really suck!
Now THIS is much better than some mismailed fridge form. Lat is back! Well done!
Thank goodness he was acting pro se. I would hope a lawyer would be a little more professional and talk to the judge about what her client wanted to disclose and have the judgment not to piss off a member of the bench.
1:07 (1)
How could the Plaintiff have recounted the events in a non "over-the-top, fratboy-'I hit that'-style"?
Wasn't it at a fratboy party that she drunkenly went down on him ... ?
At the very least, he should be sanctioned. If this were a sincere motion, rather than the fratboy "I hit that" bragging, he could have used more temperate language and added less description. The court needs to be reminded that a prior relationship exists which may bias the judge's decisionmaking. The court does not need a play-by-play describing how loud this moron allegedly screamed.
1:07 (1)
How could the Plaintiff have recounted the events in a non "over-the-top, fratboy-'I hit that'-style"?
Wasn't it at a fratboy party that she drunkenly went down on him ... ?
Why should he be sanctioned? Maybe if he was a lawyer, but there's a lower standard for pro se parties.
Funny nonetheless - definitely a nice break to evidence...
"[R]esulted in the plaintiff screaming so loud... he may have set off an alarm in a parked car outside."
Sounds like Her Honor has got some mad skillz....
1:20(1)
Maybe she was a little heavy on the teeth
Objection, your honor: Fellating the witness.
Sanctioned? As others have noted, the guy was pro se. I'd even hesitate to issue sanctions if counsel filed the motion. It's tacky, but so was the underlying conduct. Nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade.
Why should he be sanctioned for the specificity of his facts?
We live in an open society, right?
....
"So then, I showed her my subpoena!"
[Room laughs.]
C'mon, this is just silly. If I had to recuse myself for every attorney/pro se who called me an asshole at one time and then later led me into a back room at a party and blew me sua sponte, no cases would ever be resolved.
do i really have to be the first person to say this straight up: she's pretty hot.
maybe loyola2L should have been um2L--at least there'd be some hotties around
How ungentlemanly! What a preposterous jerk.
1. He is pro se, but I think we can assume that he is the Richard Seitz of the Miami Firm "The Law Office of Robert C Seitz P A" and thus arguably knows better. http://www.floridabar.org/names.nsf/All/C8C2AEB64F391DDE85256A830046AB9A?OpenDocument
2. He refers to himself as the defendant in the first paragraph of the complaint. Nice shoddy draftsmanship.
3. He claims he was the victim of 'multiple car accidents' - requiring in total 3 surgeries. I wonder how these actions were cummulated / how he suffered multiple car accidents at the hands of the same defendants.
Her honor seems to be married now. How nice for her husband.
1:37: I hereby nominate you for Greatest Comment Ever.
All rise!
This is a great post, and a fantastic motion, but pretty clear that this guy is a crank and probably lying.
I think this motion deserves a little more than a contempt, more like an unsanctioned beatdown.
1:37: You aren't kidding.
If she is that hot now, imagine how good she looked in 1983.
2:01,
EXACTLY!
Why did I go to school in a Northern climate? In my next life I no which law school I am choosing.
I hope she sanctioned the hell out of him. He could have done this in a different manner. I could have filed a motion asking for her recusal based upon the fact that they engaged in some sort of sexual act together many years ago. He needn't include the dirty details.
I picture 1983 Judge Flores:
(a) looking less like a judge and more like a hot 19-year-old college student, and
(b) wearing a neon-orange spandex Jazzercise outfit, with headband and/or side-ponytail, like chicks wear to '80s parties today.
Hot.
So studly! I'm weak in the knees!
Please. What a jerk. Paragraph 5 especially - hey genius, your advances weren't rebuffed "by the court", she wasn't a judge then!
This is great...thanks for the relief from the torture of Evidence class.
Judge should have went with her initial instinct: asshole.
If it's false, she could deny the motion and sanction him.
I am a lot younger than these two, and I am not sure I would recognize the face or name of some chick who blew me at a party during undergrad. I had trouble remembering there names when it was happening.
This guy sounds like a nut, esp. based on the order revoking his probation for stalking. He's probably making this up, much like that Riches guy but with less writing talent and less imagination.
I would love to see an order from the judge denying the motion on the grounds that she has no idea who the hell he is, and therefore is fully capable of rendering an impartial judgment.
I mean, obviously it was GREAT for him, but clearly unimpressive for her. Freshmen...
best comment thread in ages.
triple threat of 1:16, 1:19, and the piece de resistance 1:37. nice work, chaps.
Gallion OUT!
p.s. the "screamed so loud" line in the motion is an all-time classic.
The way he conflates college co-ed Mary Barzee and "the Court" is hilarious. E.g.:
"[P]laintiff, then only a freshman, began to apologize, again, for running into the court..."
what a whore...nuff said
The story is better every time you read it. The first time they met, she called him an assh@le. The second time they met, she bl@w him until he screamed.
You can't make this stuff up. Pure gold.
Field Marshal DiBlasi OUT!
The only sensible response is, "Mr. Seitz obviously has me confused with any one of a number of people, real or imagined, whom he may have met while in college. Motion denied."
I picture 1983 Judge Flores:
(a) looking less like a judge and more like a hot 19-year-old college student, and
(b) wearing a neon-orange spandex Jazzercise outfit, with headband and/or side-ponytail, like chicks wear to '80s parties today.
Hot.
Posted by: Anonymous | November 14, 2007 02:08 PM
---------------------------
Now picture those ugly clothes on the floor and that sweet little ponytail as a useful hadle-grip.
"While the Court cannot identify Mr. Seitz by name, Mr. Seitz has provided enough specific factual references (e.g., the bloodcurdling scream that is forever etched in the court's memory) to suggest that this encounter occurred as Mr. Seitz recalls."
followed by either:
a) Motion Granted
or
b) However, if judges were to recuse themselves in every instance where a former drunken hook-up appeared before them, the justice system would grind to a halt. Motion Denied.
You know, as I read it again, he says that the girl (judge) took "the
defendant" to a back room and then there was felatio that caused "the
plaintiff" to scream. So it was a threesome? And which defendant?
The "Northern Trust Bank of Florida"? That bank is such a player. I happen to know that NTBF got herpes from a girl at a local community college its senior year.
This is just the kind of female jurist I wanted on the Supreme Court with me.
Well, they were interrupted - maybe he has witnesses? She might not want to sanction him unless she's pretty confident it isn't true. If she sanctions him he might have to rely on truth as a defense. Awkward.
Incidentally, it sounds like she chomped on the man. Why else (given that he did not finish) would he scream so loud it set off a car alarm outside?
What's amazing is that anyone here actually thinks this guy is credible.
Wonders if the line "The Plaintiff believes in giving many an oppurtunity to prove themselves. . . " in the final paragraph was a last minute pun?
1:37, well done, sir.
This is the thread that just keeps on giving -- laughing out loud at "Rehnquist's Ghost." Uhoh, my secretary is looking at me funny.
Gallion OUT!
"1:37: I hereby nominate you for Greatest Comment Ever.
Posted by: Anonymous | November 14, 2007 01:57 PM"
I have to disagree, greatest comment ever was, "you're supposed to say first, dummy"
That's still funny as hell!
The assertions in this motion are probably false and hence this post sucks.
As does mine.
Nominates the Judge as an official "ATL Hottie"....
imagine the coconuts on this guy if this story is completely fabricated. Either way, this post has made me competely forget that my firm refuses to issue a bonus match
Apropos of nothing, found a great article (or a great title for an article, I don't read law journal articles so I don't distinguish the two).
DE MINIMIS NON CURAT LEX: THE CLITORIS, CULTURE AND THE LAW
http://www.law-lib.utoronto.ca/Diana/fulltext/fund.htm
"First you want to kill me. Now you want to kiss me. Blow!!"
She has a Bachelor of Music degree from U Miami (see link). And now we all know what instrument she played.
Looks like he's done some time? http://www.3dca.flcourts.org/Opinions/3d05-1097.pdf
3:11, LOL. Nice!
The male organ?
Does even crazy pro se guy have to give a blow-by-blow account?
Doesn't this sound just like the plot of some adult movie?
Scene 1: They run into each other on the street. She calls him an @hole.
Cut to....
Scene 2: They meet for second time where she proceeds to ....
lol
3:15, check the third post.
Was the fact(?) that Plaintiff screamed meant as a compliment or an insult to Her Honor? On first reading I thought it was a compliment . . . ?
Assuming this isn't totally fabricated (which it probably is), why is he raising this for the first time now?
From the motion, it sounds like this case has been going on for a long time. (According to the case number, perhaps since 1999.) He got some bad discovery rulings, and now he's trying to get a new judge.
I think this is another example Dan Solove can use in his revised paperback edition to "The Future of Reputation." This is exactly the kind of motion that five people would know about were it not for the Internets. How would you like to be the judge? Her husband? Her kids? I'd bet 20:1 that this never happened, but now we all know about it, and most of you seem to believe this doofus. Craaaaaaazy.
Oral argument requested?
Oral argument requested?
1:40 - are you serious--you think she's HOT?
my boy, you have been out of the sunlight for too long. methinks you are wearing punch-drunk-been-writing-this-brief-for-3-days-goggles.
1:40 - are you serious--you think she's HOT?
my boy, you have been out of the sunlight for too long. methinks you are wearing punch-drunk-been-writing-this-brief-for-3-days-goggles.
She might not be able to overcome a gag order. A blow for justice, perhaps? Strike that.
Res ipsa loquitur!
Lol @ 4:28
Ahhhh..... *This* is why we read ATL.
to puhleaze - ask anyone in Miami - the Judge is hot now, and was hot then. But she has been with the now Hubby for a long time.
Forgive my ignorance on this, because I was a mere baby in 1983, but did they have car alarms back then? And were they so sensitive as to be set off by a scream in a house? Seems like pretty advanced technology to me....
6:02: Totally! Such a good call.
Robert C. Seitz, the pro se filer, is dangerous. Born 2/6/64, in miami felony criminal case no. F01019975, Seitz was charged with felony agrravated stalking and violation of a domestic violence injunction. Doctors Haber and Ditomasso performed psychological evaluations to determine competency and the defendant had CT scans and neurological issues. In felony criminal case F01019972, he was convicted of felony battery on a woman and sentenced to 4 years in prison for violating his probation. He has a misdemanor stalking case as well M1033770. His last know n address is 6356Manor Lane, South Miami FL Suite 103, 33143
6:02: Car alarms actually used to be a lot more sensitive and went off forever.
Complaints about the incessant noise have led to car alarms becoming less sensitive over time and, thank goodness, they automatically turn off after a short period of time.
In sum: a blow job in '83 could set off an alarm for a loooooong time. Oh yeah.
When's the oral argument?
You guys are effin' hilarious.
reading these comments made my day...esp 8:44...well done...
FYI: Barzee is the 5th judge on this case, the first 4 were presented with recusal motions and they took the easy way out by granting them. The filer is NOT the attorney Robert Seitz, this is a pro se filer who is a dangerous whack job who has been through 8 attorneys and was previously charged with some kind of stalking crime. Judge Barzee is courageous for not letting this continue to clog up docket time, my guess is she is going to see this through to get it done and out of the system. The pro se filer used to stalk a reporter in So Florida, I think he used to curl up on her doorstep and cry if she wouldn't return his calls, if I remember correctly.