Rule 1.280

The Florida Supreme Court got busy last week! There are amendments coming to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. In re Amends. to Fla. Rules of Civ. Proc., ___ So. 3d. ___; No. SC2023-0962, 2024 WL 2341793, at *1 (Fla. May 23, 2024)("shall become effective January 1, 2025"). In some part, these rule changes are part of a larger effort by the Court to address timeliness, see Workgroup Report on Civil Cases (January 2022). There has been a lot of discussion in the last 24 months, and the simple fact is that civil litigation is going to change.

Now, the students of the law are already saying "this is workers' compensation, why do we care?" That is fair. The Florida Supreme Court has clearly conceded that the OJCC is not and has never been a "court," and that it cannot make rules for the OJCC. Those are deep waters, and for today's purposes we will skim over them. That admonition is true. But, the OJCC can and does adopt rules of practice, pursuant to section 440.45.

And some of those incorporate other rules. For example:

Rule 60Q6.114 Discovery "(2)(a) Depositions of witnesses or parties may be taken and used in the same manner and for the same purposes as provided in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.

Rule 60Q6.114 Discovery "(3) Production and entry on land. Any party may seek production of documents or other tangible things from other parties or non-parties and may seek entry onto land or other property as provided in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.

Rule 60Q6.114 Discovery "(4) Responses and objections to depositions, production, or entry shall be made as provided in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure."

Rule 60Q6.114 Discovery "(5) The judge may enter orders to effectuate discovery, including orders compelling discovery, protective orders, and orders imposing sanctions as provided in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to comply with or for using discovery methods not specifically authorized by statute."

Some will readily notice that the 60Q Rules do not cite specific Florida Rules of Civil Procedure by number. Thus, it is arguably process that is being incorporated by these references or reliance on the Civil Rules. One 60Q does not even mention the Civil Rules, but merely says "60Q6.120(6)(6) The summary final order standard provided for in this rule shall be construed and applied in accordance with the Florida summary judgment standard."

Some will readily question the impact of the Supreme Court's recent changes to various Civil Rules.

The correct answer is as clear as the nose on your face. It is "it depends." It depends on the arguments and authorities that parties bring to the assigned judge in a particular case, and it depends on that judge making decisions. That is not a very comforting answer, "it depends," but it is the right answer.

At this point, some might be comforted to be reminded that the Court's changes "shall become effective January 1, 2025." Yes, there is likely nothing to panic about tomorrow.

Rule 1.200 is focused on "a detailed procedure for modifying the deadlines set forth in case management orders." It addresses pretrial conferences, case management conferences, scheduling issues, and deadlines. One might ask, what in the 60Q Rules would be argued to somehow incorporate or reference Rule 1.200 or these various changes?

Rule 1.201 addresses "complex litigation." Some might argue that workers' compensation can certainly become complex. Anyone in doubt should take a look at cases like N. Collier Fire Control & Rescue Dist. v. Harlem, 371 So. 3d 368 (Fla. 1st DCA 2023), reh'g denied (Sept. 26, 2023), review denied, No. SC2023-1486, 2023 WL 9016526 (Fla. Dec. 29, 2023) and Normandy Ins. Co. v. Bouayad, 372 So. 3d 671 (Fla. 1st DCA 2023). There are some complex and challenging issues in Chapter 440.

Nonetheless, one might struggle to see the applicability of Rule 1.201 in workers' compensation. What 60Q Rule would one argue incorporates this Civil Rule or its processes?

The next Rule addressed by the Court is Rule 1.280 "General Provisions Governing Discovery." This rule seems to create a disclosure duty for all parties "in general" to provide supporting documentation and information that it has. Some see this as pre-empting the need for a request, as discussed later in Rule 1.350. That rule is "production of documents and things and entry upon land for inspection." Some might argue that sounds like Rule 60Q6.114 "production and entry." Others might argue that the "as provided in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure" should be read to also incorporate the new Rule 1.280.

Others might note that Rule 1.280 includes "written interrogatories; production of documents or things or permission to enter upon land or other property for inspection and other purposes; physical and mental examinations; and requests for admission," and they might also remember that traditionally neither interrogatories or requests for admission have been allowed in workers' compensation. Sure, you might argue about the provenance of that, the authority, or even the history. But, perhaps arguments about 1.280 will consider a variety of thoughts, conclusions, or assertions?

There will be those who see no specter in the Court's changes to the Civil Rules. There will be others who see challenges or implications. But, all should remember that "the Court's changes 'shall become effective January 1, 2025.'"

The Florida Bar has a Rules Advisory Committee. Mr. Taddeo is the Chair. The Workers' Compensation Section of The Florida Bar has a Rules Committee. The Florida Workers' Advocates has a Rules Committee. And, anyone may communicate directly with me if you have suggestions, questions, or proposed rule changes (not about a specific case, keep it general). Unlike the days of the Supreme Court Workers' Compensation Rules, we are not on a fixed schedule for considering change or other rule discussions.

The crux of all this is (1) the Court has made changes to Civil Procedure; (2) some may make arguments that those do or do not impact workers' compensation cases; (3) opinions and conclusions may vary among lawyers (and judges); (4) there are opportunities to express your thoughts and make your arguments; and (5) the Supreme Court's changes are not effective until 2025.

Kumquats and Pudding

Much is determined by the groceries. If all you bring us is kumquats, banana pudding, and spam, you can hardly be shocked when the judge doesn't conjure a gourmet meal as a result. People like to complain about judicial decisions, but before you blame the cook, look at what groceries were brought.

That said, there are some reasonably terrible cooks out there, whose best efforts with a filet mignon may not be fit to feed a raccoon.

In the naïveté of our youth, we were all led to believe that judicial positions naturally attract the best and the brightest. In truth, that is not fair. Sometimes people rise to "the level of incompetence," see the "Peter principle." Sometimes people become head chefs because of factors other than talent.

Maybe you can accept that, maybe you cannot.

But, perhaps you plea, "That cannot be true for appellate judges?" Well, in fairness, appellate judges are no more likely to be exceptionally smart than college professors. physicians, or any other profession. Whether you are willing to buy it or not, there is no inherently greater propensity for mental ability or agility in any group of people. It turns out there is a spectrum of talent in every profession, strata, and category.

That said, perhaps the greatest strength of appellate judges is their tendency to make decisions through a collective and sometimes collegial process. That collaboration perhaps rounds off some of the rough edges? The same might be said of the physician who sends you for a second opinion or evaluation by some specialist. The collaboration and contributions of multiple minds may lead to a better effect.

In the end though, there is nothing magical about being a judge, an attorney, or an electrical engineer. Each worked to achieve some recognition. Each is likely worthy of some dignity. And, each profession has a few involved who perhaps should seek a career instead in some alternative vocational opportunity.

Recently, I have written about a judge who thought risque hot tub pictures on social media were a good idea. See Hubris and Petulance (May 2024). There have been many posts here that discussed judicial behavior, some examples are Arrested and Charged (January 2024); Revisiting Judicial Discipline (May 2022); The Sleuthing Judge (October 2017), Judicial Discipline and Being Aware (February 2019), and The Practice of Law (July 2021). Judges have to be exemplary, and appearances matter. 

More recently, the news has raised some concerns about sleuthing again, according to WAFB9 Baton Rouge. A Louisiana District Judge was told a jury had reached a verdict convicting a defendant but discovered the verdict was not unanimous. Judge Eboni Johnson Rose sent the jury back to deliberate further. That was seemingly appropriate.

The jury then returned and "cleared (the defendant) of all charges." The "verdict (was) read into the record," and the trial was concluded. Judge Johnson Rose then "met with the jurors privately" to inquire further. Her investigation led her to conclude that the jurors did not intend to acquit the defendant. So, she summoned all parties back to court and reversed the acquittal. That is troubling.

Judge Johnson Rose appropriately recused herself and another District Judge was assigned. The new judge declared a mistrial but refused to reinstate the acquittal. Louisiana's "First Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed that ruling" (acting collaboratively). The matter was then appealed to the Louisiana Supreme Court.

A unanimous Supreme Court reversed the refusal to reinstate the acquittal, reversing the second District judge and the appellate court. The Supreme Court concluded that the verdict of acquittal was final when announced in court. A concurring justice noted that judges cannot meet with jurors during deliberations. That justice noted that Judge Rose's actions "shock the conscience."

Despite that criticism, one must admire Judge Johnson Rose for entering the recusal and removing herself from the case. Whether the jury was missteered, poorly instructed, or merely misunderstood, she was wrong to interfere with the verdict after it was announced. But, she preserved the dignity of the court by removing herself from the case. 

Nonetheless, two trial judges failed to recognize or appreciate the sanctity of the jury's work. Certainly, the jury did not accomplish what it wished. The sleuthing judge's inquiry revealed it only sought to convict of a lesser offense, not to acquit. Judge Johnson Rose, perhaps naively, sought to interject into an imperfect system and to correct the jury. Notably, however, in the first instance, the jury perhaps steered poorly based on the very instructions that Judge Johnson Rose gave it.

This example does not likely inspire confidence in the courts or the jury system in a broad sense. That is an undoubtedly imperfect system. And, the outcome is positive. The process ultimately reached an outcome, a finality. 

Another Louisiana Judge made national news more recently for an allegedly "unheard of ruling that overturned a rape conviction." Newsweek reports that Judge Gail Horne Ray threw out a rape conviction of Donald Link from 1973. The news has been critical of Judge Horne Ray because she might be perceived to have sympathies for defendants. Her son "was convicted after admitting to a series of (6) rapes." The judge's son is reportedly serving a sentence of "50 years in prison" and will "serve at least 25 years." It is possible that Judge Horne Ray has feelings about the crime of rape.

Judge Horne Ray, in the unrelated 1973 Link rape conviction, essentially reversed a life sentence, as an appellate court might do. She concluded that in 1973, "the jury was given improper instructions." Though the conviction was already affirmed by the Louisiana Supreme Court in 1974, Judge Horne Ray has concluded that she knows better and has decided to clear the convicted rapist. 

The matter is significant, and will likely be in the news further. The press is interested today because Judge Horne Ray is currently presiding over a "high profile rape case" of a Louisiana State University student in 2023. This young lady was allegedly raped in a vehicle and then "left...on the side of a highway." Later, "she was hit by a car and died."

There are questions being raised about Judge Horne Ray being impartial. The release of convicted rapist Link is cited, as is her own son's conviction and incarceration in 6 rapes. While there is no discussion in Newsweek of disqualification, there is perhaps a suggestion of the appearance of impropriety and thus of partiality.

There are so many constraints on judicial activity. They are all listed in some detail in the Code of Judicial Conduct (I cite Florida's but every state has one and they are quite similar). Perhaps the most difficult to interpret or enforce provision of the Code is the "appearance of impropriety."

There is a clear command in Canon 2:

"A judge shall respect and comply with the law and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary."

The implication (at least) is that the judge will follow the rulings of appellate courts. The commentary to Canon 2A states that

"Irresponsible or improper conduct by judges erodes public confidence in the judiciary. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny."

That broad "appearance" may be the critical issue. Does the public perceive that in Judge Johnson Rose? Or does she simply see the potential for that public perception? Is that why she recused herself following her sleuthing? One hopes so. One hopes that no one expects perfection from imperfect human beings who strive to do the job well and to reach the right result. When mistakes are made, recusal is a valid method to clear the field, avoid criticism, and maintain public trust. 

Does the public perceive an unbiased and impartial Judge Horne Ray? In the event that Judge Horne Ray remains assigned to the prosecution against the four young gentlemen accused of the 2023 LSU rape, there may be Canon 2 grounds raised about "public confidence." It is also possible that Canon 2 allegations of a more general nature may be raised.

These are issues with which judges struggle daily. In proceedings across the country, there are a variety of human challenges. Humans are imperfect. Public perception of their imperfections are important to particular cases and the broader public confidence in courts, decisions, and judges generally. 

In all instances, reaching the right decision is initially up to the trial judge. In the event that a party perceives failure in such a decision, the redress is in appellate review. In it all, the fact is that every element at every level is just as human and imperfect as the rest. But, the appellate courts tend to have advantages in time, retrospection, and collaboration. 

Whether Kumquats or Filet, despite the groceries provided, the judge's job is to make an informed and impartial decision. The judge has to do the best possible with what the parties bring. And the real value judges bring is impartial, unbiased, and fair proceedings. When they err, the redress is in the appellate courts, and ultimately disagreement may persist even there. 

An appellate court may disagree with a trial judge. Another appellate court may disagree with the first. There is no cut and dried. There is no "this court is brighter than that court." There is, simply stated, human frailty and propensity. There is perspective and effort. Ultimately, there are appellate decisions that provide guidance or constraint. That is not because any element is more perfect than another, but ultimately those decisions provide predictability and consistency. 

James Alfred Stanley

A law firm website in Jacksonville is currently returning an "under construction" page. The Florida Supreme Court ordered attorney James Alfred Stanley ordered attorney James Alfred Stanley to stop accepting new clients in April. He is to stop practicing law while an investigation is ongoing. The Court appointed a referee to oversee that investigative process.

They say that once something is on the Internet, it lasts forever. That is perhaps an overstatement. However, a popular archive system called the Wayback machine does have what it represents are archives of the law firm's website. The material includes pictures of the firm attorneys, "Al and Steve." The other attorney is perhaps Steven Myers of Maitland.

According to the archived. Mr. Stanley graduated from Florida State University in 1981 and earned his Juris Doctor at FSU in 1988. He was admitted to The Florida Bar in 1989, so he has been practicing law for about 35 years. The website in the archive notes that he was "Trained By The Enemy – Built To Compete." There are various representations about various situations and cases in which he represented injured workers and others.

However, he is now accused of "stealing money from his clients' settlements," according to First Coast News. It wrote of the Florida Supreme Court order in early May 2024, noting the Court's conclusion that Mr. Stanley might be a risk of "immediate and serious harm to clients or the public." It is, unfortunately, not the first post in this blog about such allegations, and there have been some attorneys over the years who have seen such allegations end a legal career.

By all appearances, Mr. Stanley has been in trouble before. His arrest in 2019 made Newsweek. His notoriety was not because of some horrific outcome, but because he was arrested for driving under the influence in affluent Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida. He allegedly had a bottle of rum in his lap at that time. Unfortunately, there is little newsworthy in those details. Too many people take to the streets daily with similar circumstances. 

However, Newsweek reported that Mr. Stanley had some colorful words with the deputies during his traffic stop. He reportedly blamed his condition on a divorce and "was unable to walk properly and refused to comply with police sobriety tests." He then explained being a lawyer and suggested to the arresting officer that he was intellectually superior as a lawyer. He then, essentially, demanded to be arrested.

No follow-up to that arrest has been found. It is not clear whether there was a trial or a conviction. Perhaps that arrest was all a misunderstanding. 

In seeking Mr. Stanley's suspension, in an April 2024 petition, The Florida Bar alleged that a bank contacted the bar in October 2023 to describe that a trust account was overdrawn. That account was allegedly in the name of "Meyers, Mooney, Meyers, Stanley & Hollingsworth." Some may find curiosity in that name when the web archives indicate the firm in this instance was Myers and Standey.

The bar explained that it began an investigation regarding the overdrawn account and was assured that the problem was merely "a clerical error," resulting in the issuance of duplicate checks. There are a variety of reasons that such an error could occur. After all, to err is human. Everyone makes mistakes. The bar followed with an audit to ensure appropriate accounting for the money held in trust. It asked the lawyer for various bank records but says they were not provided.

Next came a subpoena for records, which was also not fully complied with. The investigation continued with a review of the bank records provided by the bank itself, and an auditor "calculated a shortage in the trust account ranging from at least $30,131.46 to at least $107,630.00" over a period of months.

The bar noted examples of curiosity. One client was alleged to have settled a case for $110,000 but was paid only $4,000 from the trust account. Another was alleged to have settled for $70,000 but was paid only $370.00 from that account. However, other payments to at least one client were found from a separate account. The bar alleges that the bookkeeping activity is not compliant with the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar.

It is yet another reminder of two critical points. First, the practice of law can be a position of great pressure and challenge. Any lawyer who finds themselves being arrested might find it a good opportunity to reassess and perhaps seek help. If that situation insinuates or involves alcohol or other substances, the wake-up call might also prompt seeking the help of Florida Lawyer's Assistance or similar.

Second, when the bar sends a letter asking for documentation from an attorney the best course would be to provide the documents. As the bar demonstrated here, the lawyer's failure to submit records will slow but not stop an inquiry. The bank is likely to provide documents (to comply with a subpoena) even if an account holder does not. And auditors, accountants, and investigators tend to be somewhat relentless.

Third, attention to bank practices is essential for all lawyers. It is more important still for those who handle money that belongs to other people. The idea of trust accounts, and segregation of such monies is drilled into every lawyer. Without quoting statistics. trust account disputes are said to consistently be in the top three lawyer discipline issues. Trust accounting is an easy way to find trouble, whether through action or inattention.

It is also critical to remember that the bar is no more perfect than anyone else. These are presently allegations and have not been proven. Everyone is entitled to their day in court, and the presumption will always be that one is innocent. That said, a lawyer's website is now "under construction," the Supreme Court has ordered him to stop practicing, and there are allegations to answer. The impact of poor record keeping, by the most innocent, can have significant impacts. 

The outcome to date is too familiar. The potential for harm to clients is too familiar. It reminds us that lawyers are in a position of great trust in this society. Their responsibilities run deep, and they have many rules to understand and follow. They are under pressure, which at times may be extreme. And, critically, there are many tools, mentors, and other outlets for advice, assistance, and relief. The lawyer, however, has to be ready and willing to seek such help.

As weeks and months pass, there will be more on this story. It may be of exoneration or not. In any event, there are lessons and reminders here for every lawyer. 

Arms Race

The British Broadcasting Corporation British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) noted recently an evolving "arms race" in the realm of deep fakes. The article explains that some humans have a curious ability to identify fake photographs on a reasonably consistent basis. Despite that, the rest of us seemingly struggle in that regard.

The supposition is, therefore, that technology will be required. Algorithms will be trained to identify telltale indicia of artificial intelligence having created content. The result of this is likely to be a tit-for-tat escalation, wherein the software that creates, these photographs (movies, voices) will be persistently self-tweaking (learning) to produce better and better fakes.

Concurrently, the detection software will be self-tweaking and persistently evolving to become increasingly self-aware and effective at spotting them. As humans, we'll sit on the sideline, these various computer programs will apparently battle it out for supremacy as regards, our future, thoughts, and conclusions. We will be spectators in a vicariousness to rival some people's deep dependence on various sports, celebrities, and more. 

As I read, I was reminded of War Games (no, not the 2008 tweak/sequel/remake, 20th Century Fox, though that was not bad as sequels go). No, the real War Games (MGM 1983). It was edgier because none of us appreciated yet what a computer was or what it would be capable of. Sure, we had heard of computers in 1983. we were not New Yorkers for goodness sake. But, we had not learned enough yet to be scared of them.

In that MGM production, with the astute and aware David (Mathew Broderick) prompting and cajoling it, the evil computer (a WOPR, which they pronounced "whopper") taught itself the folly of "global thermonuclear war" by playing against itself in tic-tac-toe. Imagine a computer trying to outthink another computer, or worse to outthink itself. The premise was entertaining. 

We watched it play round after round to repeated, mindless, and inevitable draws. Despite knowing the probable outcome, we watched. In a movie setting, compelling and entertaining in the futility. In the NCAA, NFL, NBA, and more, perhaps not so much. People pay to watch the Browns, knowing full well how each season (perhaps largely each game) will end. 

But, is the reality of this new "arms race," any less preposterous. Can these computers compete with each other to any kind of supremacy or will they each simply tune, adjust, and persist indefinitely? I can just picture the screen flashing up that tic-tac-toe game at blinding and yet ever-increasing speed. Ultimately, might these competing manipulators and detectors simply stop and with my current conclusion

"the only winning move is not to play," War Games, 1983

As I strove to grasp that arms race prognostications conclusion, I ran across discussions on Quora and similar suggesting that, as computers, gain functionality, sentience, emotion, and greater capability, we must recognize their individuality, and afford them the rights and protections guaranteed under our constitution. You read that right, some feel your smartphone may one day have rights. 

In short, some contend that “all machines are created equal, they are endowed by their Creator (us) with certain inalienable rights.” And I pause. And I reflect. The courts have already started to side against the computers. AI-generated work is not capable of copyright protection. Can software, however sentient, therefore be guilty of defamation, or invasion of privacy? What would you do if it is convicted, put it in an isolation server somewhere to reflect on is miscreant errors, and rehabilitate? Would there be endless appeals to prevent powering it down?

Is this "the biggest bag of odorous excrement ever?" (Margin Call, Lionsgate, 2011) Are we at a moment in time when computers having rights is worthy of discussion? What rights would these computers have? Would it be appropriate for a computer to have the right to keep and bear arms? Does a computer have a right to privacy?

The astute reader will note that the United States Constitution in fact has no right to privacy. There are two points about that. First, the rights enumerated in the Constitution are certainly recognized. Second, that by no means equates to them being the only rights recognized by the courts.

Should computers and robots have the right to vote, hold office, be secure in their homes? Might we be eventually faced by a contest between two sycophantic automatons in an arms race of striving to entice voters with goodies while simultaneously striving to identify, expose, and leverage real or contrived flaws in the sentient program each is running against? It sounds terrifying, but perhaps so unrealistic it bears no further thought? Surely, we would see right through such contrivance, or would we need our own AI to help us decide how to vote?

My goodness, perhaps bolstering the voter roles for your favorite candidate could just come down to an arms race of who could deploy AI programs fastest? No need to attract voters, AI could just build its own. With the AI writing other AI, the explosion of eligible voters could expand exponentially with extreme rapidity

I return then to The Wizard of Oz (MGM 1939), and keep repeating in my head "Lions, and tigers, and bears, oh My!"

An arms race? Will there be computers to tell us what to buy? Will there be computers to warn us about the programs that tell us what to buy? Will there be servers that flood us with pandering information its algorithm thinks we will like, or to which we are likely to react? Will the sheep follow the tech? John Archibald Wheeler once noted

"We live on an island surrounded by a sea of ignorance. As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance."

I am not sure which is growing faster, the island or the shore. And, I am unconvinced I want to know the answer. I asked my AI, and it replied simply: "that is a paradox." So much for helpful AI.

What Keeps us up at Night

Billy Joel penned a huge hit in We Didn't Start the Fire (Columbia 1989). It expressed the angst of a generation, perhaps two. The theme is recurrent in the refrain:

"We didn't start the fire

It was always burning, since the world's been turning

We didn't start the fire

No, we didn't light it, but we tried to fight it"

See, the point is that the world was in a state of general higgeldy piggeldy and that was not his generation's fault. Various perspectives adopted it, and perhaps many felt no ownership or responsibility for various challenges that Joel selected. Whether those issues truly caused him angst or merely rhymed well we shall never know.

Examples from the lyrics include: "Red China," "Joe McCarthy," "Richard Nixon," "North Korea, South Korea," "H-bomb, Sugar Ray, Panmunjom," "Vaccine," "Joseph Stalin,"Communist Bloc," "Dien Bien Phu," "Elvis Presley, Disneyland," "Princess Grace, Peyton Place, Trouble in the Suez," "Little Rock, "Bridge on the River Kwai," "children of thalidomide," "Castro, Edsel," "Psycho, Belgians in the Congo," Ole Miss," "Malcolm X," "Bay of Pigs," "JFK - blown away," and so much more.

It was a troubling time, 1989. President Reagan had stood up to the communists and stared down the "Evil Empire." There was some wonder about where that would lead. The Berlin Wall soon fell that year. By 1991, the United Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR) was no more. Communism and Socialism had lost. Capitalism was king (well, for a day perhaps). 

In 2023, a band called Fall Out Boy (a punk band) covered the song (Elektra Records). Well, "covered" is perhaps a poor description. It copied the refrain and emulated the style. However, the cited agents of angst were new and updated. The fears of 1989 had given way, it seems, to a whole litany of modern challenges for a new generation. 

These include: "Arab Spring, L.A. riots, Rodney King," "Deep fakes," "Oklahoma City bomb," "GMOs, Harry Potter, Twilight, Michael Jackson," "Nuclear accident, Fukushima," "Crimean Peninsula," Kim Jong Un," "More war in Afghanistan," "Obama," "Unabomber," "bombing Boston Marathon," "Trump gets impeached twice," "Y2K," "Brexit, Kanye West and Taylor Swift," "Sandy Hook, Columbine," "George Floyd," "YouTube killed MTV," "Elon Musk," "Jeff Bezos, climate change," "World trade," and more.

There is parallel in the music, the style, and the approach. There is also similarity in the threats. Note that Korea is in each ("North Korea" and "Kim Jong Un"). The threat from Russia is present in each ("Communist Bloc" and "Crimean Peninsula"). Notice that each notes politicians, trouble spots in the world, and domestic challenges. Each includes some reference to change in pop culture and our personal distractions. 

It is rare that I enjoy a remake much. I refuse to even dignify some efforts as "remakes." There are "repeat" movies I have never seen. But, I digress. That said, I like both versions of We Didn't Start the Fire. The idea is catchy, and the update is pertinent and thought-provoking. I immediately wondered if some rapper or country singer will similarly cover it in 2057 with yet another update of concerns?

Troubling as many of these topics may be, however, do they really capture what is causing people angst and concern? Or, are there issues that touch people more profoundly and personally?

When the next update is captured, perhaps there is some chance for challenging topics such as:

1. Rampant inflation
2. Corrosive divisiveness
3. Disrespect
4. The Federal deficit and debt
5. Exaltation of minutia over substance
6. Ad hominem attacks
7. Failed 4th Estate
8. The end of the rule of law
9. Runaway equity in the eye of the beholder
10. The demise of listening
11. Ignorance celebrated

At the end of the day, Wendy Syfrett likely phrased our posture and probabilities best with

“I’m just a chunk of meat hurtling through space on a rock. Futile and meaningless.”

Indeed. On a rock, without steering or other control. Hurtling. Yes, this rock is traveling at a great pace through the galaxy and spinning constantly. There is no controlling it. There is no control over other people, their conflicts, preferences, and idiosyncrasies. As society breaks down into various elements for the penultimate "us versus them," there is much in which we might find fear. 

There is great interest in Hollywood depictions of zombie attacks and potential apocalypse. Imagine being surrounded by wholly subordinate, singularly focused, relentless, and deeply flawed beings incessantly pursuing their goals. The theme is troubling, but thankfully it is a mere Hollywood trope. Thank goodness.

In the chaos that surrounds us, there are those who find both intrigue and joy. There is an element among us of radicals, terrorists, nihilists, subversives, and insurrectionists. There is a population whose ultimate goal is destruction. They label it and gloss it as some perception of progress and improvement, but their goals are all about destruction, subversion, and sabotage. It is not about progress, but about ruination. It is frankly troubling to watch and difficult to understand. 

In a nation founded upon freedoms, many find themselves too frequently silenced by fear. In a nation of laws, too many find it convenient to both disrespect and disregard the law. In a nation of due process, there is too often the tendency to instead celebrate expediency over dignity. There is too often a failure of discourse and courtesy. And at the root of it all is seemingly the rule of law. 

But, in the end, there is not enough law, courtrooms, or other tools to deal with the volume of challenges we face. In fact, there is a foundation of societal morality, humility, and civility upon which the law is built and rests. It is that foundation that is cracked, and its failure could ultimately undermine whatever structures we place upon it. 

What keeps us up at night? Is it who will win the next sports championship? Is it where our next meal will come from? Is it in the latest appearance of some faux celebrity inexplicably followed by millions of sycophantic social media zombies? Is it in the next insipid video challenge to sweep the nation with distraction? 

Perhaps all such things have a degree of merit. Importance is in the eye of the beholder. At least from the pop culture perspective, perhaps, each item in We Didn't Start the Fire is a valid reminder of the vast spectrum of issues that various people find important. Perhaps the spectrum is a reminder of just how different we all are. 

A Harbinger?

We are all too familiar with the recent storm that struck Tallahassee. May 10, 2024, was a tough day when the power went out in Tallahassee. There were some optimists that bought into an automated website estimation that power would be restored that morning before lunch. That was a bit ambitious. Friday passed, as did Saturday, Sunday, Monday . . .. I was sitting in Paradise and kept hearing Chuck Jackson in my head: Any day now (Wand 1962). Most were very eager to get the power restored. 

On Tuesday, May 14, 2024, electrical service was restored and our systems at the Office of Judges of Compensation Claims began to spool up and reboot. Exhilaration and relief soon turned to patience. There are lots of tools and software working for you each day. They work together, and they each need some time to power up, re-establish relationships, and function as normal. It is fair to say that "normal" returned finally on Wednesday, May 15, 2024.

The storm that hit May 10, 2024, was a bad thunderstorm and it included tornados. It was serious. Not to belittle or deny, but it was not a hurricane. Hurricanes are a breed unto themselves. 

Hurricane season starts soon (June 1, 2024). It will be a long 6 months of pensive tropics-watching. Every year, I set Google to automatically open the NOAA page each morning. I watch that threat map and I worry.  I really love the one that they keep up during Respite Season ©2023, see It's That Time Again (April 2023). It stays static week after week. They have switched, and today it merely shows no activity. I love this image also, but know it will not persist. Some days this year it will be covered with little "X marks in various colors. 

I have written a great deal about hurricanes over the years. Examples include National Disasters and Planning Ahead (December 2018), Time to Prepare for Hurricane Season (May 2017), Sally in September (September 2020), The Waffle House Index (May 2017), and Hurricanes Past and Future (April 2018). I have lived through more than my share, including direct hits in Paradise, direct hits on family members, and direct hits on my OJCC team out there in so many locations. We have had hurricane closures in places like Orlando that I historically misperceived as "safe." There is no part of Florida "safe" from hurricanes. 

So, thinking of the season each May is not new. The May 10, 2024 Tallahassee storm was a reminder. Not a prediction. Regardless of what the scientists tell you, they cannot tell how many are coming this year, where they will hit, or what their severity will be. 

In fairness, they can predict, but anyone can do that. I predict (1) there will be more than I want, (2) too many will strike population centers, (3) there will be property damage somewhere, and (4) you will be really lucky if none of it impacts you or yours. In that, you are not alone as the whole East Coast and Gulf Coast face risks and threats from these storms. All of Florida is at risk for hurricane impact.

The power had been back at the OJCC in Tallahassee for hours when a storm cell walloped Houston, TX. That is about 500 miles west of Paradise. We watch their weather because their storms often become our storms. Houston was devastated with 100+ MPH winds, flooding, and death. One official told NBC7 it was serious, such as has not been "seen in Harris County since Hurricane Alicia in 1983.” That was a few months back, huh? We hear of "century" storms (the likes of which only happen so rarely). Well, this storm cell seems to perhaps fit that characterization. That is saying something in Houston. 

 

Ok, so the news about Houston gives us (1) it was a serious storm, (2) there was a great deal of damage (3) it could take weeks for power to return to all accounts. More troubling, 7 people lost their lives. It was a storm with little warning, it was serious, and people died. That is often said of various hurricanes. 

We get it. Hurricane season is coming, we need to prepare. That message is old, but it bears repeating each year. The May 10 and May 16 storms are each a harbinger. 

Let's focus elsewhere on our Houston analysis. Let's consider something that is said too infrequently. Let's think about what comes after the storm. As KPRC2 reports, there were 7 deaths blamed on the storm:

1. "a 57-year-old man in northwest Houston who died trying to move an electrical pole."
2. "a 60-year-old man who lost power in the storm went out to his truck to plug in his oxygen tank."
3. "lightning hit a trailer that went up in flames, killing an 85-year-old woman."
4. "A Houston mother of four died when she went outside to move her car so it wouldn’t get hit by a tree. As she was doing that, a tree came down on top of her, crushing the car."
5. "a 72-year-old cement worker was killed when a crane collapsed and slammed down on the cab of his truck."

The details of the two additional deaths have not been published, but one of those likely involves a falling tree because two of the deaths "were (reportedly) caused by falling trees." 

There are lessons in the details we have though. Much of the interruption of power is due to falling trees and limbs. Storms will cause trees and limbs to fall. It is tragic when one kills someone. Remember that those limbs and trees can fall long after the winds have subsided. That said, during a storm is not the time to try to protect your car or other property. Leave the car there, it is not worth your life. You have warnings of approaching hurricanes, prepare then or evacuate. 

The fire death in Houston is tragic. Know this, once the winds get significant, the fire department may not respond to your urgencies or needs. Your call to 911 may garner nothing but a calm voice unable to send the police, ambulance, or other services. You may be very much alone. Plan, evacuate when ordered, and avoid this. The unexpected storm in Houston did not afford that opportunity. But we can learn from the tragedy. 

Electricity is unpredictable and dangerous. If there is a power pole or line in your way, leave it in your way. There may be delay, but in time someone will come to move that pole. There is no percentage for you in moving a power pole, an electrical line, or anything that is touching a power line. Electricity is dangerous and you cannot tell when a wire is or is not energized. As services are restored miles from you, a momentarily inert line may be suddenly dangerous again. 

If you are in need of medical equipment or medications, have that stockpiled. It is unfortunate when there is no electricity to power your oxygen tank or other medical treatment modality or tool. Prepare for that difficulty. There are many tools, but the easiest is likely a UPS or other battery. Such a device may be a lifesaver for those dependent on oxygen, nebulizers, and more. Having your vehicle is helpful, but having redundant methods to get you through the aftermath is critical. 

You can be in the heaviest, biggest, safest vehicle in the fleet, and there will always be something bigger. The photos of the concrete truck in the cited articles are sobering. Work accidents happen during storms. People with safety training are hurt and killed by storms. People in the biggest, baddest vehicles around are killed in storms. The driver of that truck was crushed by a falling crane. Unexpected, unpredictable, and so seemingly random. There is no "safe" place in a storm, no "safe" vehicle. That is why 911 will calmly tell you that they cannot dispatch one of those huge fire trucks to save you in the midst of a storm. 

There will be many engaged and busy in days and weeks to come. They will reconnect power, trim trees, dispose of debris, repair buildings, care for injuries, and more. A storm is an event, but the reaction, recovery, and rehabilitation are much longer, more labor-intensive, and unfortunately often more dangerous. In the moment, there is a focus on the situation, the danger, and the threats.

In the recovery, there has to be caution, consideration, and self-care. Every one of these events is only the beginning of a long road home for any stricken community. There will always be events. Those will always include bad outcomes for some and tragedies for others. But, in that, there is a reminder for the rest of us. Danger lurks in storms and in their aftermath. 

As we prepare for the 2024 season, stock our shelves, consider our evacuation plans, and mentally adjust, it is a worthy time to remember that the aftermath may be as bad or worse for our safety than the storm.

Let Houston and Tallahassee be a harbinger. Take their impact and challenges as a warning and motivation. Know that storms will come. Know your practice may be affected, even if the actual storm path and power outage is hundreds of miles distant. 

Get prepared now for the season. Review your plan. What would you need, what would you take, where would you go, who would you stay in contact with, how would you inform others (family, employer, etc.) of your location and status, how would you finance your evacuation, do you have special needs? 

The best time to plan, those calm weather winter months is past. But in fairness, you have some time. June is traditionally not as active, the season is just beginning. Review in May, or June if you must, and facilitate smoother and simpler reactions if the next storm is in your neighborhood. Prepare your practice to be without e-filing. Know that the worst can happen and that your safety is paramount when it does. 

Remember that the recovery from any storm may be long. Prepare to feed yourselves for at least 72 hours with canned goods. Prepare to be without power for weeks. Think about how you will power your tools like phones and computers and the internet. Think now, plan, and prepare. 

A harbinger, an opportunity to think, plan, and prepare. It was a tough week last week for many. We think of all they are going through with sympathy, and we turn our minds to what the season may bring. Think about you, the potential impacts, and how you can and will react. Now is the time. 

Human Resources 101

The last challenge any manager needs is an employee in crisis. That said, everyone has the potential for crisis. Life brings events and circumstances that are destabilizing and disturbing. Humans respond to this differently in terms of the depth and duration of our reaction(s) and adjustments. As we prepare to present the next iteration of The Point (A Bob Wilson Production, in conjunction with WorkCompCollege.com), mental health is on my mind this week. 

Mental health is a complex and deep set of issues. An author on the subject provided the following interview once:

"SR: So generally speaking, what is it in our brains that can go so wrong and cause mental health problems?
DB: Well, that's a hole with no bottom, isn't it?"

The point he is making is that we are complex. The vast volume of chemical and physical activity in one minute of human life is beyond astounding. Check Just a minute: incredible numbers at play at the macro and micro level, published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal. Your body and mind are amazingly complex and persistent at work in maintenance, sustenance, and renewal. It is, frankly, unbelievable and amazing. 

Part of our foundation is personal and internal, certainly. But, we are social animals and there is a great deal of our lives that depends upon the actions and inactions of others. That person that cuts you off in traffic, the service provider that does not deliver as promised, that neighbor who won't leash his puppy. 

These are human interactions and they impact us. But, a great many of our interactions are at or about work. Our livelihood depends on our success in that environment. And as managers we have to work with a multitude of people who, like us, are imperfect, stressed, and facing challenges. 

There are a multitude of perspectives on the workplace and human potential. Today, a sizeable population of people have no interest in being in a workplace. Time and again, I hear the refrain in our hiring process "the applicants all want to work remote." That was a viable method of limping through a pandemic. For some companies and employees, remote work remains a way of life today. It is not for every employer nor for every employee.

I was recently on a conference call in which an executive described the office as "a ghost town." There was disappointment and pain in that voice. I have met as a guest speaker with various teams by Zoom. Some of those groups relate that they are "never" in the office, and only see each other on a video call bi-monthly at most. Some express that with enthusiasm and verve, others not so much.

Mental health and the workplace. There are potential benefits from remote work. I spoke recently with an attorney who is remote several days per week. The attorney related that life is less stressful because a quick break from work allows time to start a load of laundry, empty a dishwasher, etc. The attorney related that evenings are less stressful because of those opportunities during the day. "

Forbes reported last year on the mental health issues intertwined with remote work. It cited similar benefits

"employees appreciate how working from home allows for a better work-life balance. This may lead to higher job satisfaction and a greater likelihood that they'll stay with the company."

The article goes on to say that remote work benefits employees with anxiety and other "neurodivergent individuals." Cleveland Clinic says that term refers to "people whose brain differences affect how their brain works." Hint for the critics out there, everyone's brains are different and so are all the people that work with those brains.

The challenges of remote work, cited in the Forbes article are

1. "struggle(s) with loneliness"
2. "(blurred) lines between their personal and professional lives"
3. "they might use breaks to take care of household chores. In a way, it's like they're always working."
4. "Focus can also be difficult to maintain."
5. "Personal disruptions—like a dog barking during an important call or a child needing immediate attention—can be harder to avoid."

These are all significant concerns. There appear to be mental health challenges both in remote work and in the office. Likewise, there are apparent mental health benefits from working remote. It is, as are we, complex. 

Employees insist on various surveys that they are more productive when working from home. Supervisors tend to conclude otherwise and often note that supervising remote workers is more stressful for them. 

If one employee is allowed to work remotely, but not all workers, does that cause stress or anxiety for the in-office members of the team? If a worker never encounters coworkers except on a screen is that troubling or challenging? In truth, either paradigm can cause or exacerbate issues, anxieties, and challenges. 

In all work, there are issues of balance and management. The world is full of workplace managers. The world is not full of good workplace managers. I find it amazing how many poor managers and management decisions we run into in the world of workers' compensation. But that is for another day. 

There is an old adage that you can learn a lot from a bad example. The news recently noted such an example at the company that is the "biggest search engine" in China. The public relations manager (that drips irony) "has apologized after her comments glorifying a work-till-you-drop culture." This leader essentially told her employees to "suck it up." The story does not say she called them "snowflakes" or belittled their abilities. But perhaps close. 

In this regard, know that the next generation is not up to your standards. I get that. No "next generation" ever was. Every "next generation" has had it easier than the present generation. They have had advantages. They have not suffered or sacrificed. They are spoiled. My elders said it of me, your elders said it of you. That is an absolute truth, and despite the various elders' perceptions or beliefs, they were all absolutely correct and fatally misinformed. Yes, you can simultaneously be 100% right and wrong in the same thought and moment. You are complex.

This Chinese manager did remind them that she is "not your mother." She tells them to get back to work and threatens that failure or poor performance might motivate her to "make it impossible for you to find a job in this industry." Her tirades reflect the mentality of a "work until you drop" devotion to the job (or to this manager). In or out of the office, such a devotion can take its toll. As I draft this at 01:55, I am wondering if I am trying to convince the reader or myself.

China apparently leads the charge of "work until you drop." there are examples cited of ridiculous work hours, 12 hours daily, 6 days per week. There are anecdotes of asinine levels of focus that causes employees to completely forego and forget personal lives, commitment, and leisure. You are complex and you need both the achievement of accomplishments and the time to slow, stop, and savor the life you are leading. 

In one of the most tone-deaf quotes, the Chinese manager tells subordinates "Keep your phone on 24 hours a day, always ready to respond." That is perhaps among the worst advice I have ever heard. Not that I ever turn mine off. Not that I am short of compulsive in checking mine. But, I make that choice. No one has ever told me to be available 24/7. There is a vast difference between checking your phone constantly and being told to do so. 

The BBC article about the Chinese PR manager is a worthy read. There has been some degree of outcry about her message and the treatment of her coworkers and subordinates. The story drew me back to the challenges of remote work, and comparisons to the conventional workplace.

In the end, there is no difference between the management of in-person and remote teams. There are simple rules that will help managers through either task. 

1. All employees are different
2. The degree of follow up and task management varies
3. Some employees are self-motivated
4. Some employees are detail-oriented
5. Some employees need supervision
6. Some employees need large projects broken into small tasks
7. All employees need to recharge and recuperate
8. Not all people are right for all jobs (sorry, that is simple truth)

Whether in the employee is here or there, management means interaction, assignment, and evaluation. The how, when, and where are all dependent on the multiple variables that make up that job and that employee. I often discuss management challenges with supervisors. They frequently lament that management is difficult. That is true.  They tend to lament tools they lack instead of focusing on the tools they have. That is true. 

The variability of humans, tasks, and details will render all of that absolutely true. The difficulty will always remain. Management will never be easy. Some will make it look easy, but one cannot fall into that trap. That Tom Brady makes quarterbacking look easy does not make it so for everyone. Management is hard. Employees are challenging. Variability is constant. Mental health is unique, fluctuating, and multi-factoral. 

The answers are therefore sometimes difficult. In the end, however, the most important challenge is reasonableness. The employee must be a reasonable contributor to the team and the effort. The manager must be a reasonable leader within the needs of the team and the individual employee. The solid, persistent, management will persistently be a need to fulfill in any organization. 

Expectations have to be personal and reasonable. Do not ask me to quit checking my phone 24/7, but similarly do not tell others that they must check their phones every minute. Recognize people's differences, strive to find their strengths, feed their personal goals to the extent possible, and lead them to outcomes that benefit the organization. Through that achievement, the employee grows and finds self-worth. The organization benefits through production, earnings, and more. 

Easily said. But, keep in mind that if management was either easy or unnecessary, the company would not need you. And no matter if you are the CEO or working in the mailroom (an antique illustration of a starting job in the bygone era of paper), someone is likely struggling to manage you as well. Are you communicating with her/him? Are you frustrating her/him? Are you focused on your mental health and considering theirs?

Register for The Point. It will be a lively discussion of mental health and various challenges we face personally and societally. 

She Must Go

An intriguing story started last November when a Douglas County Probate Court Judge was before a Judicial Qualifications Commission in Georgia. The whole story is reported in detail on Law.com. Fox5 Atlanta reported last summer that she faced "40 allegations of alleged judicial misconduct," after ten others had been dropped by the Commission because "some did take place before...her candidacy."

The trial of the judge went on for days. That in itself is not necessarily common. I have been following judicial discipline decisions for decades, and it is far more likely for a judge to admit error, seek mercy, and move on. But, there is no reason for a judge to do so if he or she believes there are insufficient grounds. Fighting for what is right is admirable.

The judge testified at some length regarding the allegations. The Commission concluded that her "attempts to avoid responsibility for these clear violations bordered on farcical, severely erroding her credibility." Credibility is critical in any witness. Stick to the facts, be consistent, and your odds increase. 

One complaint had to do with disregarding courthouse security. That incident resulted in revocation of the judge's "after-hours" access to the courthouse. There were allegations in the defense that the accused judge had been subjected to "a contentious judicial atmosphere" and that there was "discord between judges" that led to some "snarky" correspondence from the accused judge. She apparently questioned a colleague "How are you a judge?"

Judge Peterson testified that she believed she was treated unfairly. She perceived that she "was, in essence, convicted guilty (in the investigation process) until proven innocent.” Commission members expressed perceptions of discord. There were allegations that the Judge's testimony about her correspondence was "confused" and that “the evidence [didn't] line up with the testimony.”

The prosecution highlighted education that had been provided about the Code of Judicial Conduct. There was emphasis that the judge had been provided a mentor "at least for the first year of...judgeship." Other witnesses attested to Judge Peterson's intellect and her adherence to process. In short, there were witnesses both for and against. 

There was emphasis on her ex-parte communication with "her HOA" in an attempt "to settle a lawsuit she had filed...though she knew the HOA was represented by an attorney." It is undeniable that the Code of Judicial Conduct precludes ex parte communication (though perhaps not in this context), but so do the Rules of Professional Conduct that apply to all lawyers (including those appointed/elected to the bench). There are rules about speaking to represented parties. Every lawyer knows them. Every judge knows them. 

The news report notes the contempt decision, which the Commission characterized as "a hasty and sickeningly disproportionate reaction." That involved a lady who wanted to correct a public document. She was sentenced to two weeks in jail for contempt and served two days. The contempt charge appears to have been viewed by the commission as untoward and unnecessary.  

Contempt is an incredible power that must be used very sparingly and respected. Too many constitutional judges joke about contempt. Too many judges have been quick to employ it. It is powerful and therefore requires great restraint and respect - from those it threatens and those who have the power to employ it. It is not for simple instances of mistake, lost patience, or frustration. 

There were allegations about social media use by the judge. The argument was raised that “actions taken outside a judicial capacity can warrant discipline only when taken in bad faith.” The judge argued that in the absence of evidence of "bad faith," the commission should dismiss the social media allegation. But, there are significant constraints on judicial comments and statements. That they are made off the bench or on social media does not change that. 

When the prosecution rested, the judge's attorney moved "for directed verdict," a decision by the commission that the case had not been proven. It was denied. Just to be sure, the judge's other attorney "move(d) for directed verdict on all counts contained in the JQC’s complaint." The case nonetheless moved on to the defense's witnesses and evidence.

The prosecution sought sanctions to limit harm to the public and the court. They suggested training, and supervision by other judges in any situation where contempt was discussed. The defense argued: 

"There’s no judge in the history of American jurisprudence that had 50 counts [of ethics violations] and yet we stand here today, after two attempts to remove her from the bench, and 20 or more of those 50 counts have been dismissed or withdrawn by the Judicial Qualifications Commission.” 

Essentially, that argument is that if a prosecutor chooses not to pursue all the charges it must equate to innocence. Prosecutors elect to forego millions of charges in the U.S. every day. That equates to efficiency and prosecutorial discretion. It does not equate to innocence in each instance, though that decision might the subject of such an argument. 

Thus, the lawyer argued “This is not a judge, that, in my view, even comes close to somebody that you would remove from the bench.” But, the Commission disagreed. 

One might find it curious that 50 charges were perceived by the defense as grounds to conclude that the judge should not be disciplined. The unprecedented "50 counts" may seem to some an indicator of problems. To others, perhaps it signals unwarranted persecution. Certainly, there is not fire whenever there is smoke, but as the volume of smoke rises the search for fire will likely intensify.

Fox 5 Atlanta reported April 1, 2024 that Judge Christina Peterson has been found "guilty of systemic incompetence" and that "she must go." The recommendation of the Commission was reportedly unanimous. Its conclusions were founded on "ignor(ing" courthouse rules, abuse() of courthouse personnel...inappropriate posts on social media," and failure to perform the job. 

There are some who excel at "the judging business" and others not so much. When allegations of wrongdoing arise, they must be investigated and conclusions must ultimately be reached. The lessons for judges are clear. Treat people with respect, check your black robes disease at the door, remember that you are a judge 24/7, and remain vigilant with your social media (like this blog post). 

Diligence, Efficiency, and Promptness

Hon. John Beamer is a Circuit Judge in the Ninth Judicial Circuit, which includes Osceola County, Florida. Osceola is just south of Orange County and includes the city of Kissimmee that many will associate with theme parks, hotels, and tourists. Judge Beamer was appointed just before the onset on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, taking the bench the month before that strange time began. In fairness, adapting to a new job had to be difficult in that moment.

Judge Beamer, like all constitutional trial judges in Florida has to face the challenge of re-election periodically. It is generally every six years. However, when a new judge is appointed, they must stand for retention election more rapidly at the outset. Judge Beamer was reelected in a primary election in August 2022. His current term runs until January 2029.

Judges in Florida are subject to a process of discipline that includes the Judicial Qualifications Commission or JQC. Complaints can be lodged there and the Commission is charged with investigation and recommendation. It cannot punish a judge. That falls exclusively to the Florida Supreme Court.

Following a JQC investigation, the Florida Supreme Court rendered Inquiry Concerning a Judge, No. 2023-153 re: Hon. John Beamer, No. SC2024-0284 (Fla. May 9, 2024). The Commission investigation revealed "dozens of cases and significant delays in rulings and orders." The Commission concluded that the judge was "counseled repeatedly without result.” When inappropriate behavior is identified and illuminated, there is benefit to all in there being both acknowledgment and remediation.

For some, there is an immediacy that is created by official action. It is different when a co-worker or chief judge points out a deficiency or problem than when an official body like the JQC does so. Channel 35 Orlando noted that filings indicate the

"chief judge of the 9th Judicial Circuit, which includes Osceola County, met with Beamer on 'no less than three occasions between late 2021 and early 2023 to discuss complaints about his delays in entering rulings and to stress the importance of entering prompt rulings.'"

The Supreme Court noted that when it undertook an investigation,

"The Commission also noted, however, that the Respondent immediately accepted responsibility for his conduct; cooperated with the Commission's Investigative Panel; and, both before and after receiving a notice of investigation, took steps to address the backlog of pending matters."

Those are critical. When you have a problem - admit it. When you fail, address it and improve. The JQC here entered a stipulation with the judge that his delays in entering rulings "violated Canons 1, 2, 3B(8), and 3C(1) of the Code of Judicial Conduct." These address performance of work "promptly, efficiently, and fairly" and diligence in "administrative responsibilities.

Judge Beamer was publicly reprimanded last week by the Florida Supreme Court. The investigation findings provide minute detail that includes "24 cases with final judgments pending more than 60 days." and 10 cases "pending more than a year since the trial." The parties in some of those cases have had meetings with the judge ("status conferences") to discuss the delayed rulings.

This is an interesting decision by the Court. And there are parallels certainly with the Florida Office of Judges of Compensation Claims. The primary parallel is that the judges of this office are bound by the same Code of Judicial Conduct. Section 440.442, Fla. Stat. That has been true since 1978 in one form or another. No JCC can claim to not know that.

Diligence is expected of constitutional judges. But, diligence and timeliness in the Circuit Court arena are more vague and subject to interpretation than in workers' compensation. In Chapter 440, this office has requirements for timely mediation, trial, and order entry. Section 440.25, Fla. Stat. These parameters of 130 days for mediation, 210 days for trial, and 30 days for trial order are also not new.

Those parameters have been part of the statute for over twenty years. Every lawyer who has practiced workers' compensation knows these statutory parameters. Almost all of the judges have experience with them from practicing law (not Judge Lewis or Medina Shore as they have been on the bench since before those parameters were legislated in 2001). And, critically, every judge has been reminded of those time parameters with each Annual Report of this Office since 2006.

There is no Judge of Compensation Claims that is not (1) aware of the requirement of timely orders, and (2) bound by the requirements of diligence, efficiency, and promptness set forth in the Code of Judicial Conduct.

It is troubling to see Judge Beamer publicly reprimanded for his delays in ruling. His delays are significant and unflattering. His explanations that delays result from "his own inadequate time management practices and work-flow issues" cannot have been easy admissions. I admire him for his candor and commitment to performing in a more timely manner. 

His struggles are impacting Floridians, and are now quite public. What judges have to remember, though, is that such delays are often the subject of ridicule and disrespect in hushed tones among lawyers long before they are truly "public" as in this instance. 

Judge Beamer has now been discussed by Channel 35 Orlando, Channel 9 WFTV, the Orlando Sentinel, and Law360. Such exposure and public discussion have to be disconcerting and upsetting. Every judge believes themselves capable and effective. In fairness, judging is an extremely difficult job and requires our very best every day. It cannot demand perfection because it is a human occupation. But it is not too much to ask for diligence, efficiency, and promptness.

Such a reprimand is a good opportunity to refocus. In truth, no one can erase yesterday; that there have been unfortunate cases in which untimeliness has occurred in the past. The hope is that with correction can come growth and a new tomorrow. That is what the Chief Judge in Osceola undoubtedly hoped when those meetings occurred. That is what the lawyers hoped when those status conferences occurred. That is what the Supreme Court hopes now that a reprimand has been required.

Bluntly, there is no merit in delay. Trial orders do not get better with age. Wine does. Cheese does. Wisdom does. But even wine turns to vinegar and cheese turns to dust. Time will not make the judge's decisions easier, the order drafting easier, or somehow the job easier. Delay will only bring accumulation of unaddressed orders, pressure, and stress. 

Everyone is rooting for the judge to rebound from a troubled start. There is admission of delays, violations, and shortcomings. There is a commitment to grow from the challenges and to meet tomorrow with a renewed spirit and verve. Certainly, there are high hopes for tomorrow. And, as certainly, there is the probability of ongoing public scrutiny. 

The best advice for any judge? Get the orders out today. Focus on the task at hand. Eliminate distractions and invest in getting the job done. Know from your peers that timely and effective performance is not only possible but quite common. Know that if your peers can do it, you most certainly can also. You need only decide that you will. 

Hubris and Petulance

There are a great many judges in this world. The idea of a judicial system is reasonably universal, though the stature, dignity, and independence of those display some significant degrees of variety across the globe. 

In the United States, there are something more than 30,000 judges. In such a broad field of people, it is likely difficult (at best) to distinguish yourself. How does one stand out from the crowd?

A suggestion, humbly, would be that there is no reason to stand out from the crowd. The job before us is one in which doing the job, day after day, with humility, consistency, and dedication is a tribute to the serious challenges people face and the critical role that judges play in analyzing conflicts, facilitating discourse, and steering disputes to resolutions.

The purpose of a judge is not to find Andy Warhol's promise. Supposedly, he said that "in the future, everyone will be world-famous for 15 minutes." There is some doubt about that attribution. And, there is some criticism. Comedian Daniel Tosh is quick with that quote and to explain the 15 minutes is an average. He then points out those in the audience who will get "zero for you, you, you, you, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero" so that Mr. Tosh can have far more than 15 minutes in that "average" conceptualization.

Judges are like cooks. Our job is largely to deal with a process that is imperfect. It is said to be an art, more than a science. In fairness, art is often in the eye of the beholder. People actually look at Picasso's work, believe it or not. Not my cup of tea, but that is what makes the world go around. 

Much of the meal is determined by the groceries. If all you bring us is unripe kumquats, banana pudding mix, and a can of spam, you can hardly be shocked when the judge doesn’t conjure a gourmet meal as a result. Ok, you can be shocked if you want to be, but your credibility will take a serious hit.

In the naïveté of our youth, we were all led to believe that such judicial positions naturally attract the best and the brightest. To be a judge, you must have something on the ball, right? In truth, judges are no more likely to be exceptionally smart, than college professors, counterworkers, or floor moppers. There is no inherent characteristic. Much of life comes down to luck and opportunity. 

Thus, appellate judges are no more intelligent or sensical than any other judges. But, at least, they tend to make decisions through a collective and sometimes collegial process. That collective effort and ample reflection time perhaps round off some rough edges in trial decisions they review. Their collective wisdom is maybe less fallible than any individual's? Well, if it makes you feel better to cling to that, that itself has value. 

Our story today is of a Nevada judge. Fortunately, or not, she recognizes her own indefatigable superiority. She is gaining 15 minutes of fame because she has made up her mind, and will not be swayed. She, perhaps sees herself as the “man who can't be moved.” As irrational as it may become, she just keeps repeating "So I'm not moving, I'm not moving." The Script, RCA, 2008. 

No, when the Nevada Supreme Court told her she had erred, and reversed in 2022, she stood her ground. The matter was brought to the Supreme Court a second time, and surprisingly, perhaps, like your mother (“what part of no didn’t you understand?“), the court agreed with itself, and told the judge again in 2023 to follow its previous instructions.

So, perhaps the court delivered clarity and its second iteration. Nonetheless, the judge in Nevada is too brilliant to be swayed by the missives of the states highest court. Convinced, perhaps of the Supreme Court's misconstruction, misinterpretation, or misapprehension, the trial judge remains steadfast in her decision.

Oh, and in her hubris, abstinence, and petulance, she earns 15 minutes of fame.

Not fame for being the calm influence through a difficult trial. Not for being the stoic ear that hears people out despite their feelings. Not for being the diligent decision-maker sorting through competing arguments. Not for the patient and dignified work of the work-a-day judge. 

No, she earns her 15 minutes of fame for being disrespectful, defiant, and disruptive. It is disappointing in this nation of laws, to witness those who flout it. It is worse when those who defy it are the very scholars that have been appointed or elected to uphold it.

Remember, Daniel Tosh? Kudos to the judges who’s lifetime “fame accounts” equal “zero, zero, zero, zero…” But as he mentions, it is an average, and this judge is studiously making up for their fame deficits. 

I have written about this Judge previously. One might recall It's the Appearance (February 2024) in which this judge's social media activities were featured. There she is not necessarily the dignified embodiment of scholarship and decorum. She posted bathing suit photographs on social media. 

That, in itself, is not a sin. I’ve had my picture taken in a bathing suit Admittedly, I have never posted photos of that on social media or elsewhere. There are things in this world worse than me in a swimsuit, but not many. 

But in that instance, this judge posed with friends in a hot tub. Before she was a judge, she was a public defender. Those she posed with in the tub are current public defenders. There is some potential for perceiving ongoing friendships and connections between those attorneys and the judge. Those attorneys and their colleagues appear in court before that judge. 

There is, at least, the potential for an appearance of impropriety in the judge's hot tub escapades. The photos show to some poor judgment and lack of decorum. They are inappropriate and unfortunate.

But, the more recent Supreme Court order is far more disturbing. The hot tub is a problem with intellect, appearance, and the Code of Judicial Conduct. The problem with refusing (twice) to do what the Supreme Court says is petulant, immature, and rebellious.

It turns out, in Nevada, that the Supreme Court apparently cannot tell Judge Erika Ballou what to do. She will not follow the orders of the state's highest court. So, more recently, the Court ordered "District Court Judge Jerry Wiese" to assign the case in question to a different judge.

District Court Judge Eric Johnson apparently proceeded within days as instructed by the Supreme Court. 8 News Now reported that it took this judge mere hours to follow the Supreme Court's decision and directions. Perhaps following instructions is not so hard after all?

Judge Ballou's punishment for not following orders of the court? She has her workload decreased and places the burden of her work on another judge. One of the not famous, workaday judges down the hall who is merely getting the job done each day rather than lounging in hot tubs and ignoring the state's highest court. 

In fairness, it is the trial judge's job to manage a docket. The trial judge is burdened with a myriad of challenges and decisions on a daily basis. It is a difficult job that requires attention, patience, and persistence. In short, it is not the job for everyone. Intelligence? Sure that helps. But in reality, it requires work, dedication, and focus.

Judge Ballou wasted taxpayer money. She exhibits a disrespect for the law. She demonstrates contempt for the state's highest court. There has been an embarrassment to the judicial profession.

If there is a glimmer of positivity, I find it in the miles between Florida and Nevada. It is a small solace, but at least this is not happening here. They say you can learn as much from a bad example as you can from a good one. I am grateful that this lesson is long distance.

So, 15 minutes for Judge Ballou, 15 minutes for Nevada, "zero for you, you, you, you, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero." All of those "zero fame" judges with their heads in the work, with their hearts in the job, getting it done every day and not being famous, good for you.