St. Petersburg May 2011 BAR ASSOCIATION · 16 Administrative Support Orders for Paternity and Child...

BAR ASSOCIATIONMay 2011 www.stpetebar.comSt. Petersburg

Paraclete - The Magazine For The Legal Professional

Contents

ST. PETERSBURG BAR ASSOCIATION

Editorial Policy: The Paraclete is published for the members of the St. Petersburg Bar Association. The magazine is published 10 times per year and welcomes submissions for publication. Publishing and editorial decisions are based on the editors’ judgment of the quality of the writing, the timeliness of the article, and the potential interest to the readers of the magazine. From time to time the Paraclete may publish articles dealing with controversial issues. The views expressed in the Paraclete are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the editors, executive committee or officers of the St. Petersburg Bar Association. No endorsement of those views should be inferred unless speMaycifically identif ied as the of ficial policy of the St. Petersburg Bar Association. Advertising copy is reviewed, but publication herein does not imply endorsement of any product, service or opinion ad-vertised. Advertising rate cards are available upon request by calling 727-823-7474 and may be downloaded at www.stpetebar.com. © 2007 St. Petersburg Bar Association.

St. Petersburg Bar Association2880 First Avenue North

St. Petersburg, FL 33713-8604Phone: 727.823.7474 • Fax: 727.823.8166

E-mail: [email protected] Referral Service: 727.821.5450

The mission of the St. Petersburg Bar Association

is to serve the legal community, to strengthen the noble calling

of the practice of law, and to foster excellence in the profession.

Executive DirectorD. C. “Chip” Collins

[email protected]

Editor Jowita Wysocka 727-669-2828

[email protected]

Paraclete AdvertisingJoAnn Knight 727.823.7474

[email protected]

Design & Production727.239.3713

[email protected]

Features–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 8 The Florida Bar Citizens Forum - By Nancy E. Biesinger

10 Judicial Profile: The Honorable Kimberly Todd Takes the Bench - By Terence A. Perenich

12 To The Victor Go The Spoils…Or Do They? Top Five Myths of Fla. Stat. 57.105 Sanctions - By Charles R. Gallagher, III

14 While We Know Florida’s Offer of Judgment Statute May Apply in Federal Court, Does Florida’s Offer of Judgment Procedural Rule Apply? – By Camille J. Iurillo and Sabrina C. Beavens

16 Administrative Support Orders for Paternity and Child Support Part I: Introduction and Action for DNA Testing - By Bernard R. Appleman

Around the Bar––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

11 April 2011 Membership Meeting

18 Summary of the Florida Bar Board of Governors Meeting

19 Bar and Court News

In Every Issue––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

4 President’s Message

6 From the Editor

20 St. Petersburg Bar Foundation

22 Community Law Program

24 What’s Up and Who’s New

26 Classifieds

Paraclete: The Spirit of Truth May 2011

www.stpetebar.com Paraclete – May 2011 3

4 St. Petersburg Bar Association www.stpetebar.com

President's Message

About the time this goes to print and you read this message, we will have had, are having, or will very soon

have our Grand Opening and Dedication for our new office. I hope we fill the streets for blocks with those of you attending. I’m honored that I happened to be President of the St. Petersburg Bar Association when this historic event took place, but I am acutely aware that hundreds of our members made donations of sweat, time and money to get us here. To each of you my profound gratitude and may you be as proud of our accomplishment as I am.

I’ll soon write my last message for the June issue as Gentry Byrnes steps into some big shoes I inherited from my predecessors. I’ve been involved with bar leadership and staff for nearly ten years now and, upon some end of term reflection, can see how so many before me prepared the way. The complexity of our Association and Foundation is truly staggering. Sections, Committees, meetings, CLE’s, finances, agendas, lawyer referrals, social events, grants, marketing, fundraising activities, elections, publications, newsletters, emails, strategic planning, member development….I think you get the idea. And while we Presidents get too much credit, it’s really the staff that makes it all happen and I want everyone to know that to give credit where credit is due.

Presidents and board members come and go, but the day to day business of the Bar Association and Foundation goes on. And if all that wasn’t enough, we went out and bought a new office and dumped all those little details on them as well this year.

Our Executive Director, Chip Collins, was to me a mentor as I started my year. He held my hand and guided me through the necessary steps, appointments, activity calendaring, deadlines, and other “do this, not that” advice that was so necessary to start my year. He made it a natural thing, gently prodding when needed, so I could hit the ground running. Little did we both know that our year was about to make a rather large, new building, course change about six weeks after I took office that leads me to this message today. It has been quite a journey for all of us in the leadership of the Association and the Foundation….but it was always Chip Collins guiding us through the steps, operating in the background, organizing this and that, and making us look good. Rob Kapusta and I had the titles, but Chip Collins and other Bar staff had the real day to day duties, on top of all the rest of what they ordinarily do in some “normal” year. I guess I just wanted to get a good head start to the traditional fairwell message of the President next month in trying to thank all those who made our year so successful. He

is so detail oriented, it amazes me. He is so clear thinking, he astounds me. He has become such a friend, it humbles me.

So as I keep these thoughts in mind, I wanted to make sure that every member of our Bar Association and Foundation takes just an extra moment to walk up to Chip or other staff member who keep us running and say thanks for what you do. Let them know you understand all the extra time and effort this year took away from their personal lives and their family time. Tell them it was worth it and that our Bar is better for it. Volunteer for a few future “volunteer days” that will be scheduled to help spruce up their home away from home and make it a more comfortable place for them and a nice addition to the neighborhood.

So now you know who the real “heroes” are in my year as President. Without Chip and Bar staff at the helm of our ship, we’d be aground right now. It’s easy to formulate plans, make policies, buy new buildings, and expect things to run smoothly. After all, they’ve got to work out the details!

Chip, JoAnn, Kathy, and Marilyn, I want to publically, and LOUDLY, thank each of you for making this year a great year in our Bar’s history. I also want to thank you for the details….

Details, Details, Details! By John W. Biesinger, III

May 2011M E M B E R A P P R E C I AT I O N R A F F L E W I N N E R

E r i n K . B a r n e t t

Sponsored by


Once again, bar associations throughout the country are celebrating Law Day, which ought

to be renamed “Law Month” or even “Law Season” in light of the myriad noteworthy events organized by the St. Petersburg Bar Association. The official theme for 2011, as promulgated by the American Bar Association, is: “The Legacy of John Adams from Boston to Guantanamo.”

Reading through the Law Day page on the ABA website1 reminded me of a popular tourism commercial on television around the time of the U.S. Bicentennial in 1976. The lyrics to the sprightly theme song were, “The spirit of Massachusetts is the spirit of America, the spirit of the old and the new.” Similarly, the spirit, ideals, and legacy of John Adams remain relevant to our contemporary legal and political challenges.

John Adams was born on October 30, 1735 in Braintree, Massachusetts, which happens to be where I spent the latter part of my childhood and early adulthood. A descendant of Puritans, Adams regarded his ancestors as “bearers of freedom.”2 Aside from the public relations nightmare known as the Salem Witch Trials in the late 1600s, the Puritans who founded the Massachusetts Bay colony in 1628 were actually highly educated and literary. In fact, they “had barely nailed together their rickety cabins when they founded Harvard so their future clergymen could receive proper theological training in Hebrew and other biblical languages.”3

Adams inherited and promoted his forefathers’ fervor for education. He began Harvard College at age sixteen and later, while writing the constitution for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Adams included a section titled, “The Encouragement of Literature, Etc.” In it, Adams emphasized that wisdom and knowledge “diffused generally among the body of the people [were] necessary for the

preservation of their rights and liberties.”

Massachusetts was one of the thirteen British colonies and site of the original Tea Party, where a group of colonists disgruntled by the Tea Act of 1773 (which gave the British East India Company a monopoly on the tea trade in America) disguised themselves as Native Americans, boarded three ships containing tea in the middle of the night and dumped their fragrant cargo overboard. You can still smell the Darjeeling as you walk by a replica of one of the ships in Boston Harbor.

The Tea Act was just one of many events that precipitated civil unrest throughout the colonies and triggered the American Revolution. Another—and significantly more violent—incident occurred three years earlier. It is commonly known as the Boston Massacre. John Adams’s role in the ensuing trial was a pivotal point in his life and embodies the spirit and vision of the nation he was instrumental in building.

By 1770, tensions between the colonists and British sympathizers had reached a boiling point. On March 5th, hostilities erupted between a group of colonists and a British sentry, resulting in a mob scene. Several additional British soldiers were called to subdue the crowd, but they were quickly surrounded. Gunfire erupted, leaving five people dead.

Following the incident, John Adams agreed to defend the British soldiers. In light of the prevailing anti-British sentiment of the day, Adams’s representation of the soldiers hardly earned him Brownie points among the Boston populace. Nevertheless, he had an unwavering belief in the principles of justice and due process, which later became central components of the United States Constitution and the American legal system. In the end, six of the soldiers were acquitted, and two who had fired directly into the crowd were convicted of manslaughter.

Had Adams carved out an exception to those principles based on convenience and personal political concerns, the U.S. rule of law might be radically different. Ultimately, his controversial position in the Boston Massacre trial did not hinder Adams politically: he went on to serve as the second President of the United States as the first lawyer-president.

In the country’s increasingly polarized political climate, this year’s Law Day theme presents an opportunity for lawyers and government leaders to consider current challenges from a historical perspective. For example, would John Adams agree with holding Guantanamo Bay detainees indefinitely and with U.S. involvement in the Middle East? Does our current form of democracy comport with the vision he and his cohorts had? Would Adams believe that contemporary lawyers-turned-leaders are guided more by their political aspirations than by the Bill of Rights? Would he be alarmed by the increasing power by state and federal legislative and executive branches over the judiciary? Perhaps by exploring these issues with Adams’s notions of liberty, due process, and the rule of law in mind, we may find common ground—and possibly some solutions.

Jowita Wysocka is an associate at PERENICH The Law Firm. She represents consumers, debtors, and injured persons in litigation actions involving bankruptcy, contract, copyright infringement, foreclosure, and negligence. Jowita is also the founder of Florida Lawyers for the Arts, Inc. She is admitted to practice in Florida, New York, and Massachusetts.

From The Editor:

Celebrating the Spirit of John Adams

By Jowita L. Wysocka

1http://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/initiatives_awards/law_day.html.2 Richard Brookhiser, America’s First Dynasty. The Adamses, 1735–1918, 13 (1st ed. 2002). 3 Sarah Vowell, The Wordy Shipmates (1st ed. 2008).


In 1998, The Florida Bar Board of Governors approved the establishment of the Citizens Forum. As reflected

in its charter, the mission of the Citizens Forum is to facilitate two-way communication with major citizen constituencies, to inform and educate the public, and to gain public understanding and support. In doing so, the Forum acts as a ‘sounding board’ to Bar programs and plans in an advisory capacity to the 52-member Board of Governors. Since its inception, the Citizens Forum has proven to be a valuable asset to The Florida Bar and has continuously been reaffirmed by the Program Evaluation Committee and Board of Governors with high regard.

If you are not familiar with the Citizens Forum, it is comprised of 12 professionals of various backgrounds from throughout the state. Each member is appointed by the president of The Florida Bar. One of the Forum’s objectives include identifying and monitoring the interests and concerns of their constituencies relating to various legal and justice system issues. Constituencies include the elderly, disabled, children and youth, women, consumers, minorities, health care, media, business and other professions as determined by the Board. The Forum also identifies opportunities to educate the public about the role and contributions of lawyers in our communities, the American system of government, the assurance of rights, and the protections afforded under the Constitution of the United States.

In addition to the 12 appointees, the president of The Florida Bar also appoints three lawyers to the panel to serve as a resource to the non-legal members. A total of fifteen different professionals from around the state come together three times a year to analyze and evaluate prominent issues important to The Florida Bar

Board of Governors, divisions, sections, committees, staff, and of course, the Forum. During the remainder of the year, the Forum and The Florida Bar continue to communicate via conference calls, emails, internet and traditional correspondence. As in any case, each issue requires research and time. Recommendations and suggestions follow. Over the years, the Citizens Forum has sustained its ‘added value’ character and continues to be a valuable conduit and vehicle in raising the understanding of legal/justice issues for all Floridians.

What are the issues, you ask? There are literally hundreds of issues that have floated across the Forum’s busy agenda - past and present. Here is a fair cross section of some of the more complex issues that have received close scrutiny. In 2003-2004, the newly formed Citizens Forum focused on the legal needs of children as victims and witnesses in cases of abuse, and the role of agency advocates, programs and legal representation. During the day-long sessions, the legal profession was sensitized to a variety of circumstances and suggested solutions needed to protect children and families. The advocate voice on the Citizens Forum at that time came from Linda Osmundson, Executive Director, CASA Inc., one of the first bay area appointments to the Citizens Forum. In 2004, lawyer advertising, solicitation and professional ethics prompted discussions between the Bar’s Advertising Task Force and Citizen Forum members. These two groups communicated at length over advertising rules and eventually produced a summary of key points taken into consideration by the Task Force for its final report. Two appointments from Pinellas County were active on the Citizens Forum during that time: Rebecca Frank, Pinellas County Law Library, and John Biesinger,

Esq., Suntrust Bank. In 2005, Past President of The Florida Bar, Jesse Diner, then Chair of the Bar’s Committee on Judicial Independence, asked the Citizens Forum for their opinion on the Schiavo case and the public’s understanding of the separation of powers doctrine. Which led to the question “How can we better educate our children and citizens?” This subject had been under consideration for some time in legal corridors throughout the state. To everyone’s desire and support, the vision and mission of Florida Supreme Court Justice Fred Lewis’ ‘Justice Teaching’ became a reality. He, and many like him around the state (including the St. Petersburg Bar), saw the critical need to bring civics back to the classroom. It generated awareness and action. It was a positive, enlightening experience for the Citizens Forum.

Numerous substantive issues have followed: judicial merit retention and selection; technology and law; adequate court funding; lawyer regulation; confidentiality of petitions for injunctions against domestic violence; ADA requirements for lawyers representing disabled clients; direct solicitation; ethics; equal access to the legal system; media issues, and most recently, lawyer advertising and the impact it has on public perception. These areas of law, and those yet to be studied, are the basis for productive dialogue and two-way communication. All are considered very important and worthy discussions. You should also know the most recent bay area appointment to the Citizens Forum in 2009 is Mary Evertz, a reporter with the St. Pete Times for 46 years. She is currently serving a three year term and offers expert engagement and perspective from her industry. We wish her much success.

These are but a few examples of the

The Florida Bar Citizens Forum

By Nancy E. Biesinger

issues and individuals involved with the Citizens Forum and The Florida Bar. As we look back over the decade, we can be grateful for the degree of cooperation and accomplishment that has taken place. Looking forward, I see the fruits of great communication which could easily be the basis for a new book (or chapter) entitled, “Sharing Success: Florida Listens”. If you would like to learn more about the Citizens Forum, go to www.thefloridabar.com, and search Citizens Forum. The next meeting is scheduled for June 23, 2011, in Orlando, at The Florida Bar annual meeting. This will be my final meeting as a member of the Citizens Forum. I wish to thank my fellow colleagues and The Florida Bar for three thought-provoking and productive years of service to our legal community.

Nancy E. Biesinger, M.B.A., is a city administrator and consultant with Franklin Affiliates, Inc. She is Vice President of the St. Petersburg Bar Foundation.


KENNETH C. DEACON, JR.

Mediation - Arbitration

Certified Circuit Court Mediator

Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer- Florida Bar Board of Certifications

AV - Rated (for over thirty years)

Past Governor - The Florida Bar

Past President -St. Petersburg Bar Association

2008 Recipient of the Barney Award for Ethics, Professionalism and Legal Experience

Elected as Florida Super Lawyer (2002-2011)

Ken Deacon has over forty years civil trial experience and has tried, as lead counsel, well over 100 major civil jury trials to their

conclusion. Ken has represented both plaintiffs and defendants.

100 Second Avenue South

Suite 902

St. Petersburg, FL 33701

Phone: 727-551-0000

Toll Free: 866-800-0426


The Honorable Kimberly Todd is no stranger to public service in Pinellas County. Having borne witness

to the dedicated service of her mother, Barbara Sheen Todd in her role as Pinellas County Commissioner, Judge Todd was inspired to a vocation of community involvement and service to the highest ideals of the law.

On February 4, 2011, Judge Todd realized her lifelong calling when she was sworn in as a Circuit Court Judge for the Sixth Judicial Circuit, Circuit Family Division. She had prepared diligently for the task as an attorney for thirteen years.

A native of St. Petersburg, Judge Todd attended Riviera Middle School, Northeast High School, St. Petersburg College, and University of South Florida, earning her Bachelor of Arts in 1991. After graduating from Mississippi College School of Law in 1996, Judge Todd returned to Pinellas County as an Assistant State Attorney under Bernie McCabe, where she prosecuted misdemeanor and felony cases from 1996 to 1999. Among the distinctions in her tenure, Judge Todd was a Lead Trial Attorney for one of the misdemeanor divisions and also served as the supervising assistant over North County Traffic Court. During that time, Judge Todd also taught Applied Ethics at St. Petersburg College, where she later continued to volunteer her time as a guest speaker on topics including family law, mediation, and business.

Following her tenure at the State Attorney’s Office, Judge Todd served as general counsel for approximately two years at Administration, Inc., overseeing complex civil litigation matters as well as handling various employment issues. For the next eight years, Judge Todd built her own successful law practice, handling a wide variety of legal issues including administrative law, appeals, collections, landlord/tenant disputes, domestic

violence injunctions, family law, corporate matters, and misdemeanor traffic cases. Judge Todd also served as defense counsel in numerous misdemeanor and felony cases. She was also a Certified Family Mediator.

Judge Todd also provided significant pro bono work for a variety of legal service organizations, including Gulf Coast Legal Services’ Legal Assistance Project, the Will McClean Foundation (where she also served on the board), the International Council of West Central Florida, and St.

Petersburg Housing Authority, where she volunteered as a hearing officer.

Thus far, Judge Todd has enjoyed the transition from private practice to the bench. She has remarked on the profound change in perspective from advocate to arbiter. Being a judge requires understanding the broader awareness of the viewpoints of those appearing in her court. Her perspective is no longer

focused primarily on her client’s individual position and objectives, but now she seeks to understand how the litigants arrived at their respective positions and to fairly evaluate how each falls within the letter and spirit of the law.

Off the bench, Judge Todd enjoys spending time with her daughters Sarah, age four, and Kaitlyn, age seven. On weekends, they attend various events around town and go to the beach. Following a lengthy campaign, the girls are happy to have their mom back and are looking forward to a possible Disney cruise. Judge Todd is also an avid hiker, swimmer, bicyclist, and former marathon runner;

she ran the New York City marathon only a month removed from the tragedy of September the 11th.

Terence A. Perenich is a partner at PERENICH The Law Firm, which has offices in Clearwater, St. Petersburg, Tampa, and New Port Richey. Terence concentrates primarily in the areas of personal injury, consumer rights and insurance litigation.

By Terence A. Perenich

Judicial Profile: The Honorable Kimberly Todd Takes the Bench


Featured Speaker:Mayanne Downs

President of The Florida Bar

Thank you to our sponsors!

April 2011 Membership Meeting


Reveling in your recent victory on a motion for summary judgment, you think back to the filing of your

Motion for Sanctions under Fla. Stat. 57.105, secure in your belief that the entire case was frivolous and without merit. You stand ready to make the happy phone call to your client advising them that not only did they prevail, but that they are now entitled to fees based upon the wisely filed Motion for Sanctions. Not so fast! Hold that that call to ensure that you really are entitled to fees.

Fla. Stat. 57.105 was designed to discourage frivolous litigation and states that the court shall award a reasonable attorney’s fee against the party and their attorney on any claim or defense which the court finds that the losing party or the losing party’s attorney knew or should have known that a claim or defense when initially presented to the court or at any time before trial: was not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claim or defense; or would not be supported by the application of then-existing law to those material facts.

Simple as it might seem, Fla. Stat. 57.105 is often misunderstood by practitioners and courts alike, and has led to considerable case law interpreting the statute. These five misconceptions will clarify this oft utilized statute…..and prevent any improvident client calls.

Myth #1. Winning a Motion to Dismiss or Motion for Summary Judgment means you are entitled to sanctions. FALSE. A summary judgment does not automatically entitle the prevailing party to an award of attorney’s fees under the statute authorizing fees as a sanction for raising unsupported claims, even if you filed your motion per statute.1 Rather, you have to prove up the frivolousness of the case independently.

Myth #2. You are entitled both fees

and costs under Fla. Stat 57.105. FALSE. Review of the statute shows that it only addresses attorneys fees and is silent on the issue of costs. Case law interpreting the statute has event denied attorney travel expenses as compensable under statute.2

Myth #3. You are entitled to fees in connection with litigating the amount of fees. FALSE. Parties are not entitled to fees for time spent litigating the amount of attorneys’ fees.3 While you are entitled to fees incurred litigating the entitlement to fees, the same does not apply to litigating the amount of fees.

Myth #4. The party seeking fees need not adduce any separate evidence aside from that which was given in support of the underlying Motion to Dismiss/Summary Judgment. FALSE. Before awarding attorney’s fees, a court must hold a full evidentiary hearing to determine whether the action was knowingly filed without merit and the party acted in bad faith.4 At that hearing the moving party must establish bad faith by substantial competent evidence.5

Myth#5. You can still obtain sanctions if part of the case is frivolous. FALSE.

An order assessing attorney’s fees under Fla. Stat. § 57.105 without a finding of a complete absence of a justiciable issue of law or fact by the losing party is deficient and must be reversed.6 In order to find a complete absence of a justiciable issue of either law or fact, the trial court must find that the action is so clearly devoid of merit both on the facts and the law as to be completely untenable.7 Armed with the truth about these common misconceptions you can now make that call to your client with confidence.

Charles R. Gallagher III is the founder and principal of Gallagher & Associates Law Firm, P.A.. His practice includes foreclosure defense, consumer law, real estate and business litigation and insurance litigation. Mr. Gallagher is a graduate of Rollins College and Stetson University College of Law. He is a graduate of Leadership St. Pete and was selected as a Rising Star by Florida Super Lawyers. He frequently lectures and serves as a media commentator on foreclosure topics.

To The Victor Go The Spoils…Or Do They?Top Five Myths of Fla. Stat. 57.105 Sanctions

By Charles R. Gallagher III

1 Salazar v. Helicopter Structural & Maintenance, Inc., 986 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); Bowen v. Brewer, 936 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).

2 Florida Gas Co. v. Spectra-Physics, Inc., 406 So.2d 1280 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).

3 State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Palma, 629 So.2d 830 (Fla. 1993).

4 Ferdie v. Isaacson, 8 So. 3d 1246 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009).

5 Cooke v. Custom Crete of Southwest Florida, Inc., 833 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003).

6 Hernandez v. Chiro Risk Management, Inc., 700 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). McMonigle v. McMonigle, 932 So.2d 369, 371 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).

7 Wood v. Price, 546 So. 2d 88, 90 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989).


While We Know Florida’s Offer of Judgment Statute May Apply in Federal Court, Does Florida’s Offer of Judgment Procedural Rule Apply?

By Camille J. Iurillo and Sabrina C. Beavens

As we all know, homeowners in Florida enjoy a generous homestead exemption granted by the Florida

Constitution. This exemption generally provides bankruptcy debtors the ability to obtain a “fresh start” and retain their home even if it has substantial equity. During the real estate boom, the homestead exemption greatly benefitted Florida debtor homeowners, but debtors who rented their homes could not receive the same level of asset exemption. Further, Florida’s personal property and automobile exemptions of $1,000 each provide almost no protection to those assets. Therefore, a debtor homeowner was viewed as having an unfair benefit by virtue of the ability to protect home equity while a renter did not have a similar exemption on the way to their fresh start. In response, the legislature enacted section 222.24(4), Florida Statutes, which provides as follows:

222.25. Other individual property of natural persons exempt from legal process. – The following property is exempt from attachment, garnishment, or other legal process:

(4) A debtor’s interest in personal property, not to exceed $4,000, if the debtor does not claim or receive the benefits of a homestead exemption under s. 4, Art. X of the State Constitution. This exemption does not apply to a debt owed for child support or spousal support.

This exemption may be claimed by a debtor, or in the case of a joint filing, both the husband and the wife, provided that the debtor “does not claim or receive the benefits of” the homestead exemption. Thus, the availability of exemptions was somewhat leveled between homeowners and renters.

Pre-recession, most homeowners would claim the homestead exemption and as a result only claim the limited personal property and automobile exemptions. Debtors whose assets exceeded the allowed exemptions would either surrender those non-exemption assets or buy them back from the bankruptcy trustee. With the dramatic decline in real estate values, many homeowner debtors opted to claim the wildcard exemption in lieu of the homestead exemption even though the debtor continued to live in the property, and in some instances intended to continue to the pay the mortgage. This decision was risky because the property was left exposed to liquidation by the bankruptcy trustee, but in the current market, that was not likely. Frustrated by the wildcard exemption excluding more property from the bankruptcy estate, the trustees in several cases attacked the wildcard exemption and argued that even though the debtor did not affirmatively claim the homestead exemption, the debtor was benefitting from the exemption by remaining in the property and/or indicating an intent to reaffirm the mortgage. As a result, a divide among bankruptcy judges developed as to the meaning of “if the debtor does not claim or receive the benefits of a homestead exemption.” Finally, in the case of Osborne v. Dumoulin, 2011 WL 320986 (Fla. 2011), the Eleventh Circuit certified a question on the meaning of §222.25(4) to the Florida Supreme Court. The Court rephrased the question as follows:

Whether for the purpose of the statutory property exemption in section 222.25(4), a debtor in bankruptcy receives the benefits of Florida’s article X, section 4, constitutional homestead exemption where the debtor owns homestead property but does not claim

the homestead exemption in bankruptcy and the trustee’s administration of the property is not otherwise impeded by the existence of the homestead exemption.

Id. at *1.

The facts of Dumoulin were stipulated as follows: Ms. Dumoulin originally claimed her home as exempt and indicated that she intended to surrender the property. Id. At the time of her bankruptcy filing, Ms. Dumoulin had planned to sell her home and lease it back from the buyer. Id. When the sale did not close, and after the bankruptcy trustee demanded that Ms. Dumoulin buyback the non-exempt equity in her vehicle, Ms. Dumoulin amended her bankruptcy schedules by deleting the homestead exemption and instead claiming the wildcard exemption. Id. The trustee objected and argued that Ms. Dumoulin was not entitled to the wildcard exemption because she had a homestead property. Id. The bankruptcy court overruled the objection which was affirmed by the district court. Id. at *2. Recognizing the importance of this issue and the split among bankruptcy courts, the Eleventh Circuit certified a question to the Florida Supreme Court. Id.

Noting the liberal history of Florida’s homestead exemption in favor of protecting citizens’ homes, the Court held that the “benefit” of the homestead exemption is the protection from creditors other than the three exceptions set forth in art. X, § 4, Fla. Const. Id. at *8. Further, the Court explained a debtor in bankruptcy may choose whether or not to exempt the homestead from the bankruptcy estate and therefore receive the benefit of the exemption. Id. at *9. If the debtor chooses not to claim the homestead exemption in their bankruptcy, the “debtor effectively


surrenders the homestead to the trustee for administration.” Id. In answering the certified question in the negative, the Court held “that where a debtor in bankruptcy elects not to claim the article X, section 4, homestead exemption and the trustee’s administration of the bankruptcy estate is not otherwise obstructed by the existence of the homestead exemption, the debtor does not receive the benefits of the homestead exemption and may claim the section 222.25(4) personal property exemption of $4,000.” Id. at *11.

While the Dumoulin opinion provided clarity on conflict among bankruptcy judges as to the interpretation of § 222.25(4), the Court left the door open for argument based changed fact patterns. For example, one case cited by the Court was In re Hernandez, 21 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B299 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. April 10, 2008), where a married debtor filed individually, did not claim the homestead exemption and claimed the wildcard exemption. Id. The trustee objected on the basis that because the non-debtor spouse retained the homestead exemption, the debtor received

the benefit of the homestead exemption as well. Id. The bankruptcy court sustained the trustee’s objection. Id. Therefore, the Court explained that “In light of the potential for debtors in bankruptcy who do not assert the homestead exemption to nevertheless receive the benefits, we do not hold that a debtor’s not claiming the homestead exemption in bankruptcy is sufficient evidence that a debtor is not receiving the benefits of the homestead exemption to allow a debtor to claim the section 222.25(4) personal property exemption. Consideration of the facts in each case to determine whether a debtor is otherwise receiving the homestead exemption’s legal benefits is necessary to ensure that the statutory personal property exemption is available only to those who meet the statute’s terms.” Id.

In sum, the Dumoulin opinion is certainly a victory for debtors who need the wildcard exemption and whose homestead is underwater. In those cases, the debtors may elect to not claim the homestead exemption on their bankruptcy schedules and risk subjecting the homestead to

administration by the trustee in favor of the additional $4,000.00 personal property exemption. However, the holding does not have a one-size-fits-all application and careful analysis of the facts of each case must be performed to determine whether the debtors may actually be receiving the benefit of the homestead exemption even though they may not have claimed it. Lastly, bankruptcy trustees, whose revenue is generated by recovering assets for the estate, may test different fact patterns and theories in an effort to weaken the breadth of the opinion and to reduce the number of debtors opting to subject their homestead to administration in favor of protecting other assets.

Iurillo & Associates, P.A., located in downtown St. Petersburg, is comprised of Camille J. Iurillo, Shareholder, Gina M. Pellegrino, Associate, and Sabrina C. Beavens, Associate. The primary areas of practice of Iurillo & Associates, P.A. are Commercial and Bankruptcy Litigation, Debtors’ and Creditors’ Rights, and Foreclosures/Workouts.


Most family law attorneys are involved in actions to establish, enforce, and modify child

support via the circuit court. However, an alternative procedure is available under Florida Statutes §409.256 and §409.2563 for the Department of Revenue (DOR) to establish child support by administrative order. Because Florida attorneys may be representing clients subject to administrative action or seeking to enforce or modify administrative orders, it is instructive to review the procedures for these types of cases.

Part I of this article reviews the process by which Department of Revenue initiates an order for DNA testing, informal and formal hearings, and means of terminating action. Part II describes the procedure for establishing administrative paternity and child support and for modifying, enforcing and superseding these orders.

Administrative Action for Paternity (DNA Testing)

Initiation of Action by DOR

DOR Services (authorized under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act) are available to any person who is caring for a child under the age of 18. Upon request of the parent (or other caregiver), DOR may initiate paternity action if it has not been established previously, e.g., by voluntary acknowledgment or by marriage. This action would be undertaken prior to an administrative action for child support.

DOR initiates an administrative proceeding for paternity with an order for genetic testing (DNA). The putative father may challenge the order informally before the DOR or formally before the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH)* . If DOR chooses to proceed with an administrative order for paternity and/or child support (discussed in Part II), the

obligor (parent from whom support is sought) may challenge the proposed order in similar manners.

DOR serves the putative father with notice, including the affidavit or declaration of paternity and a proposed order to appear for genetic testing (DNA). §409.256(4)(a), F.S. Service is by certified mail, return receipt or other approved means of process service. §409.256(4), F.S.

Informal and Formal Hearings

The putative father may request an informal hearing to review the order with DOR up to 15 days after being served. §409.256(5)(a), F.S Within 15 days of receipt of DOR’s decision to proceed with DNA testing following an informal hearing, the putative father may request a formal hearing before DOAH. §409.2563(5) (b), F.S.

The formal administrative hearing is held before an administrative law judge (ALJ), typically at DOR facilities. At the hearing, both parties may present witnesses and testimony in a manner similar to that of a circuit court hearing. The Administrative hearing is governed by the Uniform Rules of Procedure, Chapter 28 of the Florida Administrative Code (FAC). §409.256(5)(b), F.S. (described further in Part II).

At the DOAH hearing, the ALJ may affirm or deny the request for a DNA order. §409.256(5), F.S Respondent or DOR may challenge the DOAH ruling by filing an appeal with the District Court of Appeal pursuant to §120.68, F.S. §409.256 (5)(b), F.S.

If the putative father does not timely respond, DOR renders an order for DNA testing. If respondent fails to appear for the test without good cause, DOR may suspend his driver’s license or vehicle registration;

impose a fine of $500; or file a petition in circuit court requiring respondent to pay costs. If DNA testing indicates a 99% or greater probability of paternity, DOR may proceed to establish paternity or paternity and support. §409.256 (6), F.S. See Part II

Terminating Administrative Action

The administrative action does not, however, prevent the putative father or obligor from proceeding in a separate action in circuit court. The obligor can terminate the administrative action by filing, within 20 days of receipt of service of process, an action in circuit court, or by notifying DOR of an intent to proceed in circuit court or an intent to pursue non IV-D issues (e.g., timesharing, parental rights) and returning the DOR’s waiver of service. §409.256(4)(a).11;.12, F.S.; §409.2563(2)(f); (4)(m); (n),F.S. Timely action terminates the administrative process.

If this action is filed after 20 days, the administrative and circuit court actions proceed simultaneously, which may result in a “race to the courthouse.” If the administrative order is rendered first, it becomes effective until superseded by a circuit court order. (See Part II). If the circuit court order is entered prior to the administrative hearing, the administrative action will be dismissed.

*DOAH is an agency of the Executive Branch of State Government and not part of the judicial system.

Bernard R. Appleman is a staff attorney at Community Law Program, primarily representing clients in family law cases. Previously, he was employed by the Office of the Attorney General in Child Support Enforcement and by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection.

Administrative Support Orders for Paternity and Child SupportPart I: Introduction and Action for DNA Testing

By Bernard R. Appleman


Summary of the Florida Bar Board of Governors MeetingTallahassee, March 2011

Submitted by Murray B. Silverstein and Andrew B. Sasso

At its March 25 meeting in Orlando, The Florida Bar Board of Governors:

• Approved the Bar budget for the 2011-12 fiscal year. The budget projects revenues of around $38 million and slightly less expenditures.

• Heard former Bar President Miles McGrane, chair of the Judicial Qualifications Commission, ask the board to oppose a proposed constitutional amendment in the Florida Legislature that would dramatically reduce confidentiality of complaints made to the JQC. The board later in the meeting adopted a legislative position opposing such changes.

• Heard the final recommendations from the Special Committee to Study Mandatory Paralegal Regulation, which have been referred to the Program Evaluation Committee. The special committee recommended that lawyers could not in any communications refer to support staff as a paralegal unless that person is a Florida Registered Paralegal. A minority report from the special committee opposes that recommendation. During the Program Evaluation Committee report, Chair Greg Coleman said the Bar had surveyed registered paralegals and out of more than 2,000 responses, only 40 were in favor of mandatory paralegal regulation.

• Approved a legislative position opposing numerous pending legislative bills and proposed constitutional amendments which would dramatically undermine the courts as now written. Opposed bills include splitting the Supreme Court into civil and criminal supreme courts, eliminating the Bar’s role in nominating candidates for some judicial nominating commission seats, removing JNCs from the selection process for DCA judges and Supreme Court justices (that bill also creates Senate confirmation for those jurists), and requiring that justices and DCA judges get 60 percent approval in retention elections. (Another measure would have the Legislature take over procedural rule-making

from the Supreme Court; the Bar already has a legislative position opposing that.) The board approved resolution also set out four principles for legislation affecting the judicial branch: a stable, secure, adequate, and permanent source of funding for the courts; the efficient, fair, and impartial functioning of the courts and administration of justice that recognizes the courts as a co-equal branch of government; providing access to the courts and legal services for all Floridians; and a continued meaningful role in the judicial selection process.

• Also as part of the legislative discussion, the board heard Barry Richard, the Bar’s outside legal counsel, recount his discussions with the Speaker of the House’s office regarding Richard’s personal views on legislative issues. Richard told the Speaker’s office that he did not represent the Bar on legislative matters, and that he could not speak for or commit the Bar to any legislative position. Those discussions apparently will help lead to a dramatic change in various House proposals with a resulting lesser impact on the courts.

• By a separate motion (as noted above), the board also approved a legislative position opposing the proposed constitutional amendment that at some point in the process would make public all complaints filed against judges with the JQC.

• Bar Chief Legislative Counsel Steve Metz said after a rocky start, the courts appeared to be doing reasonably well in the budget process for the 2011-12 fiscal year. The House preliminary plan would have cut judicial salaries by 8 percent, but the Speaker interceded and included enough money to keep judicial salaries intact. Attempts to reduce overall judicial pensions appear to have failed, although judges may wind up contributing to their pensions, as will other state employees including court staff.

• Chief Justice Charles Canady spoke to the board on the court’s current year budget crisis, caused by a sharp reduction in foreclosure filings which provide the bulk of the court

system’s funding. He said House and Senate leaders were amenable to a plan for the courts to borrow funding to make it to the end of the fiscal year, but that Gov. Rick Scott asked for more information and so far had only agreed to provide funding to keep the courts going until the end of April. He also praised the House Speaker for restoring money to prevent a judicial salary cut, which Canady said would have undermined the ability to attract and keep qualified judges. He warned, though, that the preliminary House budget, perhaps by mistake, eliminated 14 law clerks from the Supreme Court, which he said would substantially undermine the court’s ability to efficiently handle cases.

• Heard from Mark Schlakman, of the Florida State University Center for Human Rights, who presented a letter from former Supreme Court Justice Raoul Cantero calling for the Bar to endorse a review of Florida’s death penalty process. President Downs said the Executive Committee will review and act on that matter.

• Approved, at the recommendation of the Member Benefits Committee, three new benefits for Bar members: Medjet Assistance, an insurance program guaranteeing medical transport when traveling; Sears Commercial Marketplace, which offers a wide range of online shopping for home and office products; and STI Tabs3 Trust Accounting Software, which assists lawyers in setting up and maintaining their trust accounts.

• Heard Board Review Committee of Professional Ethics Chair Carl Schwait report that the committee will be presenting its recommendations for amending Bar advertising rules at the board’s May 27 meeting. He said the Supreme Court has ordered that the amendments be submitted to it no later than July 5.

• Recommended to the Supreme Court Winston W. Gardner, Jr. of Orlando, Steven S. Oscher of Tampa, and Marni F. Stahlman of Winter Park to replace Arnell Bryant-Willis as a public member on the board.


Bar and Court News

PINELLAS ASSOCIATION OF CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYERS (PACDL)

The St. Petersburg Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers monthly meetings are held the second Wednesday of each month. The next meeting is:Date/Time: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 – 12 noon to 1:30 p.m.Program: Turning Point will be providing lunch. The CEO will speak to attendees, as well as a Turning Point alumni, and a tour of the outpatient facilities will follow.Location: Turning Point Outpatient Building, Marge Porter Resource Center 6311 Sheldon Road, Tampa, FL 33615

RSVP by May 5, 2011 to seth@roberteckard law.com. All attorneys are welcome to attend. For more information on PACDL contact Rebecca Hamilton, Attorney at 727-471-3555 or email: [email protected].

ST. PETERSBURG ASSOCIATION OF LEGAL SUPPORT SPECIALISTS

The St. Petersburg Association of Legal Support Specialists monthly meetings are held the first Tuesday of each month. The next meeting is:Date/Time: Tuesday, June 7, 2011 – 5:45 p.m.Program: To Be AnnouncedLocation: Orange Blossom Catering 220 4th Street North, St. Petersburg

Reservations are required. All legal support staff and attorneys are welcome too. Contact Susan Batchelder for more information at 727-502-8219 or register by sending an email to [email protected] or call 813-318-5717 and leave your name and a daytime telephone number.

PINELLAS COUNTY PARALEGALS

The Pinellas County Chapter of the Paralegal Association of Florida, Inc., meets on the second Tuesday of each month. The next meeting is:Date/Time: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 – 6:15 p.m.Topic: Copyright Basics and Avoiding InfringementSpeaker: Jowita L. Wysocka, Esq.Location: Antonio’s Pasta Grille 2755 Ulmerton Rd., Clearwater

Paralegals, student paralegals, non-members and attorneys are always welcome. For further information or to make reservations, please contact Cynthia Stephens: [email protected] or Chrystal Lunsford. For more information on the local chapter contact Chrystal Lunsford at [email protected] or visit the Paralegal Association of Florida website at www.pafinc.org.

ASSOCIATION OF LEGAL ADMINISTRATORS – SUNCOAST CHAPTER

The Association of Legal Administrators - Suncoast Chapter normally meets the second Wednesday of the month. The next meeting is:

Date/Time: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 – 11:45 p.m.Topic: To Be AnnouncedLocation: To Be Announced

For more information please contact Eric Hinote at [email protected] or visit the ALA website at http://www.alasuncoast.org/ for more information.

May 2011


St. Petersburg Bar Foundation

The mission of the St. Petersburg Bar Foundation is to fund, develop and promote efforts which enhance the legal profession and encourage better public understanding and access to the judicial system.

By Robert Kapusta, Jr., Foundation President

I recently read a news article which stated that based on the census data, in eighteen states a majority of the

children under the age of eighteen were not of European descent and that this trend was continuing in a number of other states. One of those eighteen states is Florida. We are heading towards a future where the minorities will become the majority and will make their voices heard. This highlights of the need for the legal profession to take steps to advance diversity.

A very strong argument can be made that because of our unique position the legal profession should be leading the way with regard to diversity. Lawyers and judges have a unique responsibility for supporting a political system that provides

broad participation by all of its citizens. The more diversity the greater trust exists by the public in the government and in the rule of law. Lawyers, because of their training, have many of the skills and often rise to become leaders both in and out of politics. As leaders, we should be leading the way towards diversity.

Purely for business purposes, the legal profession needs to be more diverse. Our society is becoming much more global. On many occasions, clients expect and sometimes require lawyers who are proficient in foreign languages and who come from diverse backgrounds. A diverse legal profession is more just, productive and strengthened because of such diversity.

Recognizing the importance of diversity, the Bar Association and Foundation put

together an exhibit titled “A Legacy of Courage, Vision, and Hope - African Americans in the Legal Community in Pinellas County”. This exhibit has been on display at the Florida Holocaust Museum and is designed to travel. For the past several years it has been on exhibit at universities, museums and other venues throughout the state. Our next generation of diversity leaders stands on the shoulders of these leaders and should be inspired by their example and courage. It is the first exhibit of its kind in Florida and unfortunately is not presently on display. If anyone is aware of any venue or location where this can be displayed, please contact Chip at the St. Pete Bar and advise him. The Foundation would like nothing better than to display this exhibit.


by Kimberly Rodgers

Community Law Program, Inc.is a non-profit corporation formed in 1989 by members of the St. Petersburg Bar Association concerned about the civil legal needs of low income residents of Southern Pinellas County, Florida. Over the years, CLP has recruited a panel of approximately 400 St. Petersburg area attorneys who provide free assistance to thousands of people in need of civil legal assistance each year. To volunteer for pro bono servive, contact Community Law Program at 727-582-7480.

With the continued stagnation in the economy, we are seeing increasing numbers of people

inquiring about filing for bankruptcy. As a result, our bankruptcy clinic, which is offered every 2nd Friday of the month from 10:00 – noon, has become our busiest clinic, second only to our family law walk-in clinic on Wednesdays. In an effort to address this growing need within our community, we have stepped up our services in this area.

On Jan. 10, 2011, we held our first ever bankruptcy community education event. This event was held at the Enoch Davis Center in south St. Petersburg and it was a late afternoon/evening event, which made it more convenient both for working clients and for attorneys to volunteer. During this event, Attorneys Ted Starr and Traci Stevenson gave presentations to the attendees that provided them with an overview of bankruptcy rights and responsibilities. Attendees were interviewed by law students to obtain basic information about their individual situations. Thereafter, attendees met one-on-one with volunteer attorneys for free legal advice.

Turnout for this event was incredible! We planned this event on this day to coincide with Stetson University College of Law’s Professionalism Day, during which law students were encouraged to participate in community events throughout the county. We had approximately ten law students help out with this event, and the following additional attorneys volunteered: Kristina Faher, Brett Cameron, Rinky Parwani, Dion Hancock, Keith Sanders, James Kompothecras, Ryan Singleton, David Singha, Jennifer Todd, and J. Armando

Edmiston. This event was so successful and well received by all that we plan to repeat it in the fall in the Largo/Pinellas Park area. The most impressive thing about this event for me is that for once, I got a chance to just sit back and observe! Elizabeth Porcelli, our Pro Bono Coordinator, planned this entire event and did a fantastic job!!

We also have stepped up our efforts to provide representation to clients who need to file Chapter 7 petitions. Although we recognize that many people (even those with limited means) can often come up with money from other sources to pay an attorney to represent them in a simple ch. 7 petition, the economy today is so bad that people are experiencing unique and unprecedented levels of financial hardship. As a consequence, those “other sources” are usually in the same boat as the client and/or are no longer available. For these people, the process of filing for bankruptcy in federal court is daunting enough even for an experienced attorney who does not practice in this area, let alone for people within our community who are poor and have little to no understanding of the judicial process. By recruiting volunteer attorneys to represent these clients, particularly those who are uninsured and have high levels of unpaid medical bills or have experienced an unexpected life event beyond their control, we hope to help them in a more impactful way.

To that end, we organized and held a bankruptcy CLE seminar on February 18 together with the other legal services providers in the Tampa Bay area. This seminar was also equally as successful as our bankruptcy outreach event. Speakers at this seminar were from all over the Tampa Bay area, including Judge Catherine

McEwen, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge for the Middle District of Florida (Tampa), Ted & Alicen Barrett, Esq. (Dunedin), Amy Boohaker, Esq. (Sarasota), and Ted Starr, Esq. (St. Petersburg). This seminar was free of charge to attorneys who agreed to provide ten hours of bankruptcy related pro bono legal assistance. We are extremely thankful to the following for the success of this event: (1) the St. Petersburg Bar for helping us advertise this seminar; (2) the St. Petersburg Bar Foundation for giving us financial support to help put on this and other similar programs; and, (3) St. Petersburg College, particularly Susan Demers, Esq., for once again allowing us to use the wonderful facility at the EpiCenter for this seminar. Also, as an added bonus, we were able to videotape the seminar so it can be made available to attorneys wishing to volunteer through our organization, who either were unable to attend the live seminar or who did not know about it. Thank you, Jimmy Midyette, from Florida Legal Services, for traveling to our area to record this seminar!

As an added incentive for attorneys who are willing to represent at least one client pro bono per year in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, we will be updating our reduced fee bankruptcy referral list and provide this list to those clients who attend our clinics, but who fall outside of the above-listed priorities for pro bono representation.

If you are interested and willing to provide any of these services to clients in need, please contact us by phone at (727) 582 – 7480, or by email at [email protected].

CLP Gears Up to Provide Increased Assistance to Clients in Bankruptcy


SEYMOUR A. GORDON, ESQUIRECERTIFIED CIRCUIT COURT

MEDIATOR

Seymour A. Gordon is pleased to announce his certification as a Florida Supreme Court Certified Circuit Court Mediator. He is now available to assist you and your clients in mediations in the following matters: Civil trial, real property, commercial litigation, corporate and business law, business disputes, wills, probate matters and foreclosures.

Martindale-Hubbell AV rating

Past President: St. Petersburg Bar Association

Seymour A. Gordon, Esquire (727) 896-8111

699 First Avenue NorthSt. Petersburg, Florida 33701(727) 822-2234 – Facsimile

[email protected]


What’s Up and Who’s New May 2011

Adams and Reese attorney, Quinn Henderson, in the firm’s St. Petersburg office, received the 2010-2011 “Boss of the Year” award from the St. Petersburg Association of Legal Support Specialists, Inc., at the organization’s recognition banquet held March 1st at Orange Blossom Catering. At Adams and Reese, Henderson is an associate in the Special Business Services Practice Group and has been practicing law since 2003. His practice focuses on construction, commercial, banking and administrative litigation, representing developers, contractors, business owners and banks.

Adams and Reese also received a Certificate of Recognition at the event for the law firm’s continued support and commitment to SPALSS. The SPALSS is one of 16 divisions of the Florida Association of Legal Support Specialists, Inc., which is a member-driven organization for individuals in the legal field who are working toward a better profession by pursuing professional excellence.

NEW MEMBERS

COLLINS, E. WILLIAM1881 West Kennedy Blvd.Tampa, FL 33606-1606Phone: 813-225-1818; Fax: 813-225-1050Email: [email protected]. from Vanderbilt University, J.D. from the University of Tennessee. Admitted to The Florida Bar in 2005. Mr. Collins is an associate with The Solomon Law Group, P.A.

DANDAR, DEBRA LYNN5509 West Gray St., Suite 201Tampa, FL 33609Phone: 813-282-3390Fax: 813-287-0895E-mail: [email protected] B.A. from the University of South Florida, J.D. from Stetson University College of Law. Admitted to The Florida Bar in 1997. Ms. Dandar is a sole practitioner.

FURLOW, CLARK1401 61st St. S.Gulfport, FL 33707PHONE: 727-562-7379Fax: 727-347-3738E-mail: [email protected]. from Boston University, J.D. from Delaware Law School. Mr. Furlow is a Professor at Stetson University College of Law.

KENT, PATRICIA A.4905 34th St. S. #146St. Petersburg, FL 33711Phone: 727-424-6436 E-mail: [email protected]. from Kean University, J.D. from Stetson University College of Law. Admitted to The Florida Bar in 2003. Ms. Kent is a sole practitioner.

KNAUST, JOSEF MARTIN150 Second Ave. N., Suite 1700St. Petersburg, FL 33701Phone: 727-502-8200Fax: 727-502-8250E-mail: [email protected] degree from the University

of Florida, J.D. from Stetson University College of Law. Admitted to The Florida Bar in 2010. Mr. Knaust is an associate with Adams and Reese, LLP.

RICKLES, STACEY A.4760 East Bay Dr., Suite BLargo, FL 33764Phone: 727-259-7500Fax: 727-584-6801E-mail: [email protected] degree from Georgia Institute of Technology, J.D. from Stetson University College of Law. Admitted to The Florida Bar in 2009. Ms. Rickles is a sole practitioner.

THORNTON, KATHLEEN1127 9th Ave. N.St. Petersburg, FL 33705Phone: 727-821-5811Fax: 727-821-1931E-mail: [email protected]. in Paralegal Studies from St. Petersburg Junior College. Ms. Thornton is a paralegal with Paul A. Nelson, P.A.

STUDENT MEMBERS

CULBERTSON, KELLYPhone: 727-424-5012 E-mail: [email protected]. from Pennsylvania State University. Currently attending Case Western Reserve University School of Law.

July/August 2011 Issue...............Copy must be receieved by noon, May 15th, 2011

September 2011 Issue.....................Copy must be received by noon, July 15th, 2011

October 2011 Issue...............Copy must be receieved by noon, August 15th, 2011

– Copy and ads received after the deadline will run in the next issue –

P a r a c l e t e A r t i c l e & A d S u b m i s s i o n D e a d l i n e s

www.stpetebar.com Paraclete – November 2009 25


SEMINOLE - Law Office for Lease - Peacock Professional Plaza, 8275 113th Street N.- Estate Planning & Family Law is in high demand in this area. Located 2 Blocks North of Seminole Mall in a Medical - Financial Center. The site is adjacent to a 55+ 773 Co-op complex and two minutes from Freedom Square, a large retirement community. One of the top maintained business centers in Pinellas County. 1-5 year lease move-in incentives. Contact Gerald D. Shotts, RSMC, 727-397-2534 (Office), 727-458-4640 (Cell.)

ST. PETERSBURG – 7235 1st Ave. So. – Office building for sale or lease. 2400’ MOL. Corner lot. Abundant parking. Recent interior renovations. Significant furnishings included. Turnkey for law or accounting firm. Call Jay Verona at 727-898-7210.

ST. PETERSBURG – Senior Practitioner has office space for lease with amenities. Large offices less than 1 block from St. Petersburg Courthouse with assigned off street parking space. Common use of reception area, Florida library, closing and break rooms, utilities except telephone, included. Contact Joe Lang 727-894-0676 for more details.

ST. PETERSBURG – COURTHOUSE SQUARE, office space for lease in downtown at 600 First Avenue North, across from the Courthouse. Covered parking, full services. Professional legal office environment, home to some of the “Best Lawyers in Tampa Bay.” One 2150 sq. ft. suite available. Call 727-821-6699 or email [email protected].

ST. PETERSBURG – DOWNTOWN: “The Paramount” 721 First Avenue North. One Block from courthouse/county building. Professional offices from $750/month. Virtual offices from $250/month. “NEW” Art Deco construction. Receptionist in stunning atrium waiting

area. Beautifully appointed conference rooms. Fax/copiers, state of the art telephone system, gorgeous kitchen/lounge, much more! Sarah W. Parker 727-502-0255.

ST. PETERSBURG – DOWNTOWN BY COURTHOUSE: Office space for rent on first floor next door to the Courthouse. 527 – 1st Avenue North, completely renovated, move in ready. Suite size can vary from 330 square feet to 1,560 square feet. Annual lease. Contact Fogarty & Finch Inc, Chris Finch, owner/licensed RE Broker 727-822-4343

Special Magistrates for the Pinellas County Value Adjustment Board - In accordance with Section 194.035, Florida Statutes, Pinellas County is currently seeking attorneys to serve as Special Magistrates for the 2011 Value Adjustment Board. A Special Magistrate may not be an appointed or elected official or employee of Pinellas County; must be a member of the Florida Bar with no less than five years experience in ad valorem taxation; and may not represent a taxpayer before the Value Adjustment Board in any tax year during which he or she serves as a Special Magistrate.

Special Magistrates will be paid at the rate of $95.00 per hour, plus mileage. A condition of appointment is attendance at an orientation meeting that is tentatively scheduled for September 23, 2011. Hearings will be scheduled during the months of October, November and December. Candidates wishing to serve should contact Cynthia N. Haumann, Deputy Clerk, Value Adjustment Board, Pinellas County Courthouse, 315 Court Street, Fifth Floor, Clearwater, Florida 33756; telephone number (727) 464-3458; e-mail address: [email protected]. Completed applications must be received on or before 5:00 P.M., Friday, June 24, 2011.

Stockbridge Mass. In the Berkshire Mountains providing hiking, swimming, theater, music and the arts all accessible from our beautiful country home - 3 bedrooms, 3 baths, minutes from museums and Tanglewood (home of the Boston Symphony). Completely renovated 150 year old Colonial. Please view at CyberRentals.com #104441.


Classifieds

Office Space: Vacation Rental Available:

Position Available:

WILL SEARCHAnyone with information on a Last Will

and Testament of Everett Wayne Shepard,a.k.a. E. Wayne Shepard or Wayne

Shepard, who resided at: 900 West Lake Road, C-217

Palm Harbor, FL 34684 please contact:

Brenna Roach at [email protected]

2011 Bar and Law School MixerOn April 14th, approximately 150 attorneys, students, faculty members and alumni attended

the annual Bar & Law School Mixer “poolside” at the Student Life Center at Stetson University College of Law.

Thank you to our sponsors for another great event!

Adams and Reese LLP

Asset Registry, LLC

D’Elia Financial Group

Fifth Third Bank

Gallagher & Associates Law Firm, P.A.

Stetson Student Bar Association Alumni Relations Committee

Stetson University College of Law

St. Petersburg May 2011 BAR ASSOCIATION · 16 Administrative Support Orders for Paternity and Child...

Documents

Transcript of St. Petersburg May 2011 BAR ASSOCIATION · 16 Administrative Support Orders for Paternity and Child...