FL Judge ALAN R. SCHWARTZ To Foreclosure Defense Attorney: You Will Have A Short And Unhappy Career…


Judge To Foreclosure Defense Attorney: You Will Have A Short And Unhappy Career…

Outrageous is all I can say…that, and I’m sad for this profession of law, for our court system, and for the people of this formerly great nation who now live in a country much different than what we we’re all promised as we sat in civics classrooms and a court system which is much different than the one good attorneys took an oath to serve, protect and defend….

THE COURT:  Just a minute. Counsel, we’re dealing here with Benjamin Cardoza III (phonetic)  so we have to be very precise.

MR. BAVARO:  Your Honor –  You know what, at this time, Your Honor, I believe that the Court has slighted me and I will make an ore tenus motion to  recuse Your Honor and to continue this trial in front of another judge. I don’t believe that the   Court calling me Benjamin Cardoza III and frankly I don’t know how it’s going to look on the record. I  don’t believe it was said in a very nice way and I do not believe that my client is receiving a fair  trial. I will — if the Court would like me to make  a written motion, I have a pad here and I will be   happy to do a written motion. I would ask that the Court recuse itself.

THE COURT:  You may file whatever you wish to file. Is there anything further?

MR. BAVARO:  I have other questions for the  witness. Can I ask the Court to give me a moment just to write up this motion recusing and ask the Court to rule on it first?

THE COURT:  I thought that was a big  compliment.

MR. BAVARO:  I don’t believe that it was said  in a manner intended to be complimentary, Your Honor.

THE COURT:  You take yourself too seriously,  much too seriously. You will have a very short and  unhappy career.     (Thereupon, the hearing was concluded.)

Rest here…



5 Responses to “FL Judge ALAN R. SCHWARTZ To Foreclosure Defense Attorney: You Will Have A Short And Unhappy Career…”
  1. Fed Up says:

    MR. BAVARO Keep fighting for your clients Thanks

  2. bobbi swann says:

    @ James M – your first post just goes to show that “open mouth; insert foot”! You are no better than the Judge on this case as you formed an opinion (regardless of your 2nd post where you had to eat crow) without full knowledge of the facts! Your credibility here has been thwarted and I would suspect that your career involves defense of the bankstas – if not, then you are just as one heck of a jacka$$. This type of demeanor appears throughout the state of Floriduh in the court system with the exception of a very few good judges who rule with law. Hopefully on the next trial for this defendant the sitting judge will be (more) honest. Score another one for (mortgage) defense attorneys.

  3. James M says:

    Sometimes humor is misunderstood. Without being there it is impossible to tell. Counsel took umbrage. I think counsel should be less thin skinned. What matters is the case before the court, the parties before the court, little else.

    Sometimes judges attempt to add humor, sometimes they dress down counsel, this does not mean they can’t be fair to the pleadings and matters before the court. I suspect a better way to handle it would have been to say, “Oh, a joke, I am sorry I missed that.”

    A good litigator is un-phased by slights, misrepresentations and errors. Like a good sailor, you deal with the weather as it comes.

    Counsel is being paid good money to weather the squalls and bring the pleadings home, not to be liked by the Court. Hopefully counsel will make sound legal arguments that will be respected by the court and if not hold up well on appeal.

    • James M says:

      OK, I have followed links through to find more of the transcript.

      I think the more complete transcript shows the court’s continued bias towards the Plaintiff, or short shift of Defense Counsel’s argument.
      No question the Court was not at all interested in allowing defense counsel to challenge the witnesses knowledge, credibility or foundation for the document.

      The Court is quite obviously wrong about Acceleration, and probably standing too, although the latter was not developed before recuseal.

      Having now read the prior transcript I think moving for the Judge to recuse was it was a sound tactical move.

      BUT – The need to add footnotes to explain what counsel was attempting to prove suggests it may have been better for counsel to find a way to outline where he was going to the court, before trying to go there.

  4. TheHutMaster says:

    Oh MY, This kangaroo Judge is in for a wild ride after this horse crap. We will dig into his dealings, finances, and mortgage. Do not threatem this group, as that silly black robe does NOT mean anything to any of us. “Your discusting career will have a very short and unhappy ending” . We are watching your criminal actions.

    “Fight the Good Fight”
    Every Minute, Every Day.

Leave a Reply