Today’s Slabbed legal minute is brought to you by Fastcase: “Smarter legal research in the office or on the go.”
Mr. Bandaries filed a Petition Seeking Return of Funds Advanced to Defendant to Maintain Her Real Property, in the Natchitoches Parish City Court, naming Ms. Cassidy as a Defendant. Ms. Cassidy responded with an Exception of Lis Pendens and Motion for Sanctions wherein she asserted:
That the sums prayed for in the instant suit are already at issue in a case between the same parties herein pending in the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans, namely, Madro Bandaries v. Joanna Cassidy, No. 2010–2840, Division “E” c/w Joanna Cassidy v. Madro Bandaries, No. 2010–2781, Division “I.” (hereinafter “CDC suit”). Additionally, the sums prayed for in the instant suit were also prayed for in Bandaries v. Cassidy, 10th JDC No. 83345, Section “B”, (hereinafter “10th JDC suit”), however, that case was dismissed on an Exception of Lis Pendens.
Additionally, in support of her request for sanctions, Ms. Cassidy asserted that “[t]his lawsuit constitutes an abuse of process as it is clearly intended to harass and impoverish Ms. Cassidy” contending that these actions justified the imposition of sanctions against Mr. Bandaries.
Following a hearing on November 10, 2010, the trial court sustained Ms. Cassidy’s exception of lis pendens, dismissed the claims asserted against her, and ordered Mr. Bandaries to pay her $2,500.00 in sanctions plus costs.
Judge Debra Nelson, a former substitute school teacher and county prosecutor, was appointed by Governor Jeb Bush to the Circuit Court in Florida in May of 1999. She was chosen to sit on the Zimmerman case by a lottery selection process of Florida judges.
Before the Zimmerman trial began, she was reasonably well known in the Florida legal community, and totally unknown outside of the state. For the 15 days of the Zimmerman trial, she was the best-known judge in the world. Her every move was analyzed and dissected by millions worldwide.
One TV analyst described her as, “An equal-opportunity curmudgeon.” If being quietly competent, decisive, and prepared makes one a “curmudgeon”, she qualified. She exerted total control of the courtroom while allowing each side reasonable latitude to make their best case.
She respected the gravity of the occasion. She had the mother and father of a dead teenager in the same room with his admitted killer, and the parents of the killer. She successfully ensured an orderly and fair proceeding. Continue Reading…………
George Zimmerman was found not guilty this past weekend in his trial for shooting Travon Martin. But his problems are far from over. You have to wonder whether there isn’t a perverted, almost paranoid sense of trying to “get” Zimmerman at any cost. Yogi Berra said, “it ain’t over till it’s over,” and he would agree that the Zimmerman case is not going to fade away. More criminal actions, civil suits, and endless analyses will be front and center, and continue the Zimmerman-Martin debate saga for a long time to come.
The case got off to a questionable start when the President felt it necessary to announce that, “You know, if I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.” The President’s comment implied to many that Trayvon Martin was a victim, who in no way compromised his innocence by his own actions in this tragedy. He was in no way at fault, and was set upon by Zimmerman. This, of course, could have prejudiced both the investigation as well as potential jurors.
The case was not taken before a grand jury, one that had been picked and was available at the time of the shooting. It’s standard procedure all over America for similar cases involving violence to go before Grand Juries. Why not in the Zimmerman case? Skeptics would argue that prosecutors assumed they could not get an indictment from a grand jury, and because of political pressures involved, went ahead and charged Zimmerman directly.
And then there was the old prosecutorial ploy – the withholding of evidence. Just before the trial began, an employee of the prosecutor’s office who headed up the IT division testified that the prosecutors had withheld significant information from Zimmerman’s defense team. And low and behold, two days after the verdict came in, he was fired. Zimmerman’s attorney Mark O’Meara said other key evidence was withheld, and it was like pulling teeth to get the prosecutor’s office to cooperate, hand over the required information, and follow the law. That will be another column for another day. Why do prosecutors fight so hard to keep exculpatory information from the defense? Continue Reading………….