You are absolutely right , this has got to be stopped and the way to do this is to put the fear of God in the judges. They alone run their courtrooms and control the decisionmaking process, that they can pull some stunt like this and it is just business as usual would have me as a defendant looking for ways to get his pension yanked. If they want to clear the backlog the way to do it is to demand compliance with FS1.110(b) and the rules of evidence. This ass-clown is only interested in collecting his $300 which conveniently is what it costs him to pay for his foursome at $75 a head. The last time I was in court the traffic cop (I’ll be charitable) “confused” me with another stop ,, he testilyed to something so foreign to what actually happened that I was left speechless… I can only imagine how the plaintiff in this case must feel.

If there is no subject matter jurisdiction, there is no judicial immunity!!!!

The judge is acting as a mere trespasser and is liable seven ways to Sunday.

If the judge fails to execute a ministerial duty there is no judicial immunity for that failure. Immunity is only for judicial acts not ministerial ones.

It seems the complaint was wholly defective to the point where the clerk shouldn’t even have accepted it much less the judge.

You said, “I’m pretty sure the defendants that were unrepresented had no idea that by taking either Conciliation or Short Sale that they were, in essence, allowing the Summary Judgment to go through.”

Yes that is a scam. Fight and I will sell your house in 30 says or take the SJ and I will order them to talk to you for the next couple of months….. When they have no real incentive to negotiate in good faith becuase they already have a SJ.

Moreover the same conversation could happen even if you fight, and even if you fight, go to trial and lose. You always have a right to come to some solution with the other party.

Both attorneys and judges have an obligation under the rules of professional conduct NOT to miss represent.

Objection to the admission of documents at the hearing, that were not served at the appropriate time before hand is inportant.
Maybe, in the same way they arrived with documents in hand, you need arrived with pre-drafted written motions to strike or in the alternative exclude all new documents presented at the hearing. A pre-drafted motion with supporting memorandum of case law, ready to go. While you don’t know what they will try to introduce at the motion hearing, you could have a generic version, objecting to any and all new documents.

File the motion in court, which gets your objections on the record, and the court is basically forced to address the motion to strike before it can grant the SJ. (There is case law on that)

You know they are going to play slime ball, you have to object, and state the legal reason why, otherwise you wave the objection.

Maybe, as a group, we need to make a defending foreclosure SJ handbook with defenses to the slime ball court tactics worked out in advance.

I think you are right about time for the moving party – my comments about getting documents filed at least 7 days prior to hearing or in person on moving party before 5pm on two business days prior to the hearing is relevant to the responses and any supporting affidavits or documents, filed by the non-moving party (the Defendant).

Neither party can appear at the SJ hearing and introduce any new documents or evidence that is not already in the record.

The court often allows a party to show an orignal of the document of which only a copy was previously in the record, and I am not even sure that is kosha. i.e. Plaintiff often brings the orignal note having previously filed a copy in the record.
I believe the correct method of substituting the real note for the copy is a motion to substitute, but not sure court can even consider that if it is not filed in good time prior to hearing.

Wake up people.

This is beyond what the naked eye can see. Follow the money.

At least this judge described the proceedings. On April 29, 2010, I appeared at a hearing in which the judge states “I’m going to give the Plaintiff’s attorneys a chance to speak with each defendant here today” – time allotted 30 minutes (approximately 75 to 100?) people that day; most were unrepresented, including me. The judge states that the Plaintiff’s attorneys will offer a Concliation Conference or Short Sale. No mention is given to Mediation as an option – at least none that I heard. Once the 30 minutes was up, the judge comes back into the courtroom, and we begin – those that were represented went first – then came the slaughter. I’m pretty sure the defendants that were unrepresented had no idea that by taking either Conciliation or Short Sale that they were, in essence, allowing the Summary Judgement to go through.

I don’t know what part of the judge’s comments irk me the most. It was obvious that he had “heard everything” and therefore, he pre-judged each of the cases before him.

Someone needs to give this judge a copy of the Judicial Code of Conduct – http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/ethics/index.shtml

Additionally, Lori, I hope you have sent a copy of the transcript to the Florida Supreme Court as well as filed a complaint with the Judicial Qualifications Commission.

This is so outrageous I don’t have the words to express my anger. As someone who has been in the legal field for 20 years, I am ashamed at the conduct of this so-called “jurist.”