Hello, You've Got (Rat Turd) Mail!

Have you ever thought opposing counsel's letter was just plain full of crap? No, I mean it literally:

''Infested with mice,'' her lawyer, Gerald Kornreich, alleges in an emergency motion.

One of Reuther's attorneys, Dirk Lorenzen, says Reuther is the dad, no question, and is generous with the kids. He has paid more than $13,000 this month in rent and support, court docs say.

Her apartment, overlooking the bay, would list for $500,000-plus, Lorenzen adds. Reuther rents the adjacent apartment. Onyewenjo claims Reuther once ''pushed his way'' into her unit, ``screaming and threatening her.''

Lorenzen calls the alleged rodent problem a ''litigation fairy tale.'' If there are critters, they could have stowed away ``in one of the boxes or pieces of furniture moved from North Bay Road where there was a mouse and rat problem.''

Kornreich's response: ''Mice and/or rat droppings'' sent in a letter to Lorenzen and Reuther's other lawyers, Christopher Klein and Thomas Baur. ''We are only enclosing a small sample to avoid a large mess in your offices and remain professional,'' says the letter, now an exhibit in the court file.

Let me try to understand this -- Gerald Kornreich encloses rat turds in a letter to another lawyer "to remain professional"?

Tell you what, I'm glad I don't practice in divorce court. Besides obvious Rule 901 evidentiary issues, you gotta feel for the office staff on all sides involved in the transmission and receipt of that lovely correspondence.

Read more from this post in Online law articles »

Dirk Lorenzen Saves Rush Limbaugh

Yesterday, the Third DCA, in a per curiam opinion, denied the Palm Beach Post's motion for rehearing and certification regarding Rush Limbaugh's marital settlement agreement. Read the opinion here.

Rush was represented by froggy-voiced divorce attorney Dirk Lorenzen (who may or may not still be at Al Caruana's law firm) and Bruce Christensen. Martin Reeder represented the Post.

The Third also denied the Post's motion for a written order. Nice.

Judge Cope's dissent makes it obvious that Rush was the beneficiary of yet another outcome-determinative, logic-free 3d DCA opinion. Apparently Rush and his former wife had the trial judge receive the marital settlement agreement, review it, initial it, and make findings about it in the hearing on the petition for dissolution of marriage. This was done, by the way, in the course of the judge's adjudication of the petition for dissolution of marriage -- not while the judge was having lunch at La Loggia. The attorneys, however, purposely did not file the agreement in the court file.

Yet the brain trust of Judges Suarez and Cortinas determined that the settlement agreement was not a public record. Not a public record?

I don't know how Dirk pulled that one off, but that's one amazing victory for his client, one more absurd legal ruling for the rest of us.

Read more from this post in Online law articles »