[CLC-Discussion] IMMEDIATE ATTENTION -- HB 7061 / SB 1384 / jurisdictional limits of county courts

[Bruce Partington]

That lower limit (25K) does make more sense. 15K to 50K is too big a jump. Also makes sense to up the small claims limit some too as Michael suggests.



Bruce D. Partington
Shareholder—Board Certified in Construction Law
125 East Intendencia Street,  Pensacola, Florida 32502
O:  850-432-1399  |  bpartington at clarkpartington.com<mailto:bpartington at clarkpartington.com>

[cid:image002.png at 01D3A384.A053BF90]


From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org <clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> On Behalf Of Michael D. Randolph
Sent: Monday, March 5, 2018 8:27 AM
To: Andrew Feldman <afeldman at feldmanlawoffices.com>; Stuart Sakwa <shsakwa at outlook.com>
Cc: clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] IMMEDIATE ATTENTION -- HB 7061 / SB 1384 / jurisdictional limits of county courts

For what it’s worth, an increase to $25,000 make sense with an increase in small claims jurisdiction to $10,000.


Michael D. Randolph | Managing Shareholder, Fort Myers and Naples
G R A Y | R O B I N S O N

1404 Dean Street, Suite 300 | Fort Myers, Florida 33901
T: 239-552-4810 | F: 239-321-5334 | D: 239-552-4810


3838 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 410 | Naples, Florida 34103
T: 239-598-3601 | F: 239-598-3164
E-mail<mailto:Michael.Randolph at gray-robinson.com> | Website<http://www.gray-robinson.com> | Bio<http://www.gray-robinson.com/attorneys/detail/1007/MichaelD-Randolph> | vCard<http://www.gray-robinson.com/docs/Michael%20Randolph.vcf>

Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/GrayRobinsonLaw> | LinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/company/grayrobinson-p-a-> | Twitter<https://twitter.com/grayrobinsonlaw>

This e-mail is intended only for the individual(s) or entity(s) named within the message. This e-mail might contain legally privileged and confidential information. If you properly received this e-mail as a client or retained expert, please hold it in confidence to protect the attorney-client or work product privileges. Should the intended recipient forward or disclose this message to another person or party, that action could constitute a waiver of the attorney-client privilege. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited by the sender and to do so might constitute a violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. section 2510-2521. If this communication was received in error we apologize for the intrusion. Please notify us by reply e-mail and delete the original message without reading same. Nothing in this e-mail message shall, in and of itself, create an attorney-client relationship with the sender.
From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> [mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Feldman
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2018 9:18 AM
To: Stuart Sakwa
Cc: clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] IMMEDIATE ATTENTION -- HB 7061 / SB 1384 / jurisdictional limits of county courts

Using a CPI inflation calculator, $15,000 in Jan of 1992 had the same buying power as approx, $26,922.56 in Jan of 2018. While we may not be talking about items measured in CPI, it seems to me that raising the jurisdictional threshold makes sense if inflation is a concern and it is increased to somewhere between $25,000 and $30,000, but going from $15,000 to $50,000 is over a 200% increase. Before even factoring in the other concerns, the amount seems a bit extreme.
Andrew Feldman, Esq.
Feldman Law
7700 N. Kendall Dr., Ste 809
Miami, FL 33156
Tel: 305-445-2005

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 4, 2018, at 10:34 PM, Stuart Sakwa <shsakwa at outlook.com<mailto:shsakwa at outlook.com>> wrote:
The $15,000 limit has been in place since 1992.  When taking 25 years of inflation into account, raising the limit is not “nonsense”.

Raising the limit will help small businesses and individuals gain access to the legal system that is now too costly.  Even large businesses complain about the cost of litigation.  In addition, the smaller claims will be resolved quicker and will help reduce the congestion in the Circuit Court.

I agree the CLC should have a conference call and take a position, but think we should support the legislation.  Perhaps we can coordinate with other industry groups such as the AGC to find out what position they are taking on this.

Stuart H. Sakwa
Board Certified in Construction Law

Stuart H. Sakwa, P.A.
8888 Rockridge Glen Cove
Boynton Beach, Florida 33473
Phone 561-810-5855
Mobile 954-261-9598
Fax 561-763-7368
shsakwa at outlook.com<mailto:shsakwa at outlook.com>

From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> <clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org>> On Behalf Of Wright, Wm. Cary
Sent: Sunday, March 4, 2018 9:35 PM
To: 'Robert Worman' <rworman at wormanlaw.com<mailto:rworman at wormanlaw.com>>; Barry Kalmanson <bkpa1 at aol.com<mailto:bkpa1 at aol.com>>; gary.brown at saul.com<mailto:gary.brown at saul.com>; clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] IMMEDIATE ATTENTION -- HB 7061 / SB 1384 / jurisdictional limits of county courts

The Section’s lobbyist is aware of the legislation and has advised The Florida Bar and the Office of State Court Administrator have been on this.  In the Section’s lobbyist’s view, this legislation has a remote chance of passing.  If the CLC wants the Section to do take an official position, it will require CLC approval, a whitepaper prepared by the CLC supporting the position, and Executive Committee approval before sending it to the Board of Governors for approval.

Cary



<image001.png>
Wm. Cary Wright
Attorney at Law

4221 W. Boy Scout Blvd., Ste. 1000
Tampa, Florida  33607-5780
Direct:  813.229.4135 | Fax:  813.229.4133

cwright at carltonfields.com<mailto:cwright at carltonfields.com> |  www.carltonfields.com<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.carltonfields.com&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7c88c0ecc2534bc31dc208d582463f18%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636558160570827874&sdata=F4k7%2BMTjR8t4WRqt2ZB3EZQWU7Nmkp0HYC1nlGphDl4%3D&reserved=0>
bio<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.carltonfields.com%2Fcwright%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7c88c0ecc2534bc31dc208d582463f18%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636558160570984127&sdata=uW9wOWnW3tEBctZIkCQxaWfiUyjmGX%2BJHc7X0zIGtVI%3D&reserved=0> |vcard<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.carltonfields.com%2FFCWSite%2FFeatures%2F_Attorneys%2FvCard.aspx%3Fattorney%3D270&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7c88c0ecc2534bc31dc208d582463f18%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636558160570984127&sdata=E1lmB%2Bf2h18XuSqX5HvvHNuRw7IdPkDGAuq8CjPZLVo%3D&reserved=0>  |LinkedIn<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Fwcarywright&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7c88c0ecc2534bc31dc208d582463f18%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636558160570984127&sdata=upiq4llPNzEAEEQaj%2Ful7J%2FuXMz2OSDWnNkdROo%2BenM%3D&reserved=0>

Carlton Fields is ISO 27001:2013 certified.

Confidential: This e-mail contains a communication protected by the attorney-client privilege or constitutes work product.  If you do not expect such a communication please delete this message without reading it or any attachment and then notify the sender of this inadvertent delivery.
From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> [mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Robert Worman
Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2018 3:49 PM
To: Barry Kalmanson; gary.brown at saul.com<mailto:gary.brown at saul.com>; clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] IMMEDIATE ATTENTION -- HB 7061 / SB 1384 / jurisdictional limits of county courts

I agree with Barry.  We need to stop this nonsense before it goes any further.

Regards,

Robert B. Worman
Worman & Sheffler, P.A.
2707 West Fairbanks Avenue
Suite 200
Winter Park, FL 32789
407 843-5353
rworman at wormanlaw.com<mailto:rworman at wormanlaw.com>
www.wormanlaw.com<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wormanlaw.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7c88c0ecc2534bc31dc208d582463f18%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636558160570984127&sdata=sBfe4vw5k0YTuEnqCBfcUhnvAamNLkh8VOvpe0MVsng%3D&reserved=0>

NOTICE:
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE AND ANY ATTACHMENT TO THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT MAY BE LEGALLY PRIVILEGED.  IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU MUST NOT REVIEW, RETRANSMIT, CONVERT TO HARD COPY, COPY, USE OR DISSEMINATE THIS E-MAIL OR ANY ATTACHMENT TO IT. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY RETURN E-MAIL OR BY TELEPHONE AT 407-843-5353  AND DELETE THIS MESSAGE.  PLEASE NOTE THAT IF THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE CONTAINS A FORWARDED MESSAGE OR IS A REPLY TO A PRIOR MESSAGE, SOME OR ALL OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS MESSAGE OR ANY ATTACHMENTS MAY NOT HAVE BEEN PRODUCED BY WORMAN & SHEFFLER, P.A.
TAX ADVICE DISCLOSURE:  TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED BY THE IRS UNDER CIRCULAR 230, WE INFORM YOU THAT ANY U.S. FEDERAL TAX ADVICE CONTAINED IN THIS COMMUNICATION (INCLUDING ANY ATTACHMENTS), UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFICALLY STATED, WAS NOT INTENDED TO BE USED, AND CANNOT BE USED, FOR THE PURPOSES OF (1) AVOIDING PENALTIES UNDER THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OR (2) PROMOTING, MARKETING OR RECOMMENDING TO ANOTHER PARTY ANY MATTERS ADDRESSED HEREIN.
PLEASE BE ADVISED THIS LAW FIRM MAY BE ACTING AS A DEBT COLLECTOR AND IS ATTEMPTING TO COLLECT A DEBT.  ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED WILL BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE.


From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> <clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org>> On Behalf Of Barry Kalmanson
Sent: Sunday, March 4, 2018 10:13 AM
To: gary.brown at saul.com<mailto:gary.brown at saul.com>; clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] IMMEDIATE ATTENTION -- HB 7061 / SB 1384 / jurisdictional limits of county courts

CLC should ASAP convene a conference call to vote on whether to oppose it.

The Bar lobbyist should attend the conference call.

Sincerely,

Barry Kalmanson
500 N Maitland Avenue
Suite 305
Maitland, Fl. 32751
407-645-4500 x 215

www.barrykalmanson.com<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.barrykalmanson.com&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7c88c0ecc2534bc31dc208d582463f18%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636558160570984127&sdata=Ufp4Uw3YVV0hobJWtl4MQ4j%2F1HTUQg3w32rxf66fQWo%3D&reserved=0>


-----Original Message-----
From: Brown, Gary L. <gary.brown at saul.com<mailto:gary.brown at saul.com>>
To: 'Barry Kalmanson' <bkpa1 at aol.com<mailto:bkpa1 at aol.com>>; clc-discussion <clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org>>
Sent: Sat, Mar 3, 2018 5:43 pm
Subject: RE: [CLC-Discussion] IMMEDIATE ATTENTION -- HB 7061 / SB 1384 / jurisdictional limits of county courts

I’m hearing the bill has gotten through committee without any “NO” votes and that the bill will likely pass the House with unanimous vote on Monday. Not sure on the Senate side.






Gary L. Brown | Partner
Board Certified in Construction Law


SAUL EWING ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP

200 E. Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1000 | Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301

Tel: 954.713.7615 | Fax: 954.713.7715

gary.brown at saul.com<mailto:gary.brown at saul.com> | www.saul.com<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.saul.com&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7c88c0ecc2534bc31dc208d582463f18%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636558160570984127&sdata=sS7aHPAKBFa6%2BfJa039vPG9XyMtFc9Fn7cBMSnwoSpw%3D&reserved=0>



* Please note that our Firm name and my email address have changed.

From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> [mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org?>] On Behalf Of Barry Kalmanson
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2018 4:02 PM
To: clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: [CLC-Discussion] IMMEDIATE ATTENTION -- HB 7061 / SB 1384 / jurisdictional limits of county courts



All,

 I’d like to bring your attention to a pair of bills with substantial negative unintended consequences.

HB 7061 and SB 1384 raise the jurisdictional limit for county courts from $15,000 to $50,000. This also means that circuit courts, rather than District Courts of Appeal, would handle appeals on cases up to $50,000.
HB 7061 is on Special Order for this Friday. SB 1384 is stuck in Approps. I believe the incoming Senate leadership is more sensitive to the problems with this legislation, so that is a good place for input if you agree this is a bad (or at least not fully cooked) bill.

Here’s a statement I just received analyzing the issue:


“Changing the jurisdictional limit for county and circuit courts will negatively impact our judicial system in ways we should avoid. Currently, issues handled in circuit court above $15,000 are appealed to the District Courts of Appeal, but HB 7061 and SB 1384 will put appeals on matters up to $50,000 back into the circuit courts.”

“Our circuit courts may not be able to handle the results. Parties who might not bother to appeal a $15,000 decision may think differently about $50,000, and that will have a caseload impact. Meanwhile, unlike judges on the five DCAs, circuit court judges won’t have law clerks to help them with the higher workload."

“In addition, the business community wants the consistency and transparency of the DCA appellate process. These bills will lead to twenty circuits worth of appeals to search and reconcile, rather than the five DCAs."

“Finally, DCA judges are required to have at least ten years experience, and usually have much more, and they are simply better prepared to handle the complexity that comes with higher dollar cases."


Please contact your legislators



"Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr LLP (saul.com<http://saul.com>)" has made the following annotations:
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
This e-mail may contain privileged, confidential, copyrighted, or other legally protected information. If you are not the intended recipient (even if the e-mail address is yours), you may not use, copy, or retransmit it. If you have received this by mistake please notify us by return e-mail, then delete.
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+

_______________________________________________
CLC-Discussion mailing list
CLC-Discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:CLC-Discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/clc-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20180305/381576b1/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 67739 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20180305/381576b1/image003-0001.png>