Sc13-1333 Motion Partial Summary - Florida Supreme … and Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510, hereby files this...

1 kelmnically Filed 101420l3 LO l221 Ahl I I

RE( E IVI D LUl420l3 lo Ii 42 rhomas D Ilall( krk Suprcmc Com

BEFOR E THE FLORIDA JUDlCI A1 QUAllFICATIONS COMMlSS10N STATE OF FLORIDA

SCl3-1333 INQUIRY CONCERN1NG A JUDGE No 12-613

LAURA M WATSON

MOTION FOR PA RTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO Til E JOCS CLAIMS THAT JUDGE WATSON VIOLATED THE PREAMBLE AND

CANONS I AND 2A OF THE CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW

COMES NOW Judge Laura M Watson and pursuant to Rule 12(a)

FJQCR and Fla R Civ P 1510 hereby files this Motion for Pattial Summary

Judgment and Memorandum of Law in support thereof and states as follows

Notwithstanding that the allegations in the Notice of Formal Charges are

demonstrably false and occurred over ten years ago a circuit court judge is a

constitutional officer with a property right in the office and constitutional

guarantees of substantive and procedural due process and equal treatment under the

law pursuant to the state and federal constitutions This prosecution not only

violates Judge Watsons constitutionally guaranteed rights but is a transparent

effolt to try to use the JOC to impact existing and ongoing litigation on a pending

motion for substantial attorneys fees and costs as well as a pending Libel and

Slander Malicious Prosecution and Abuse of Process civil action

It is undisputed that the JQC is investigating conduct occurring ten years ago

when Judge Watson was a practicing attorney and not a judge was not a candidate

for judicial office and was not performing any judicial function1 Based on this

alleged misconduct the JQC has claimed that Judge Watson violated the Code of

Judicial Conduct The alleged violations cannot serve as a basis for a violation of

the Code of Judicial Conduct

The Florida Supreme Court has stated definitively The Code of Judicial

Conduct governs the activities of all members of the judiciary even those seeking

to become members Canons 1 2 and 3 however are directed only to a judge and

hence cannot constitute an independent violation as to a judicial candidate who is

not yet a judge In re Kinsey 842 So2d 77 85 (Fla 2003) Consequently even

when viewed in the light most favorable to the JQC for purposes of summary

judgment the facts do not support a finding of liability on the part of Judge

Watson for violations of the Preamble and Canons 1 and 2A of the Code of

Judicial Conduct for the alleged misconduct of Judge Watson when she was a

practicing attorney and not a judge was not a candidate for judicial office and

i Though Judge Watson believes that the JQC should stipulate to these facts in an abundance of caution an affidavit setting forth these facts is filed under separate cover and attached hereto

2

was notperforming anyjudicialfunction

STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS

There is no dispute that the JQC instituted proceedings against Judge Watson

based on allegations that Judge Watson violated the Preamble and Canons 1 and

2A of the Code of Judicial Conduct as well as various alleged violations of the

Florida Rules of Professional Conduct See Notice ofFormal Charges pp1 7 and

8 It is also undisputed that the charges filed by the JQC are based upon acts

alleged to have occurred between 2002-2004 The JQC claims that [t]hese acts if

they occurred as alleged would impair the confidence of the citizens of this State

in the integrity of the judicial system and in [Judge Watson] as a judge would

constitute a violation of the Preamble and Canons of the Code of Judicial

Conduct Notice ofFormal Charges pp 7- 8

It is also undisputed that the conduct in question occurred approximately ten

years ago when Judge Watson was not a judge but was a practicing attorney was

not a candidate for judicial office and was not performing any judicial function

Based on this alleged misconduct the JQC has claimed that Judge Watson violated


The gravamen of the Notice ofFormal Charges is that on or about June 18

3

2004 the FatherSon legal team of Larry Stewart and Todd Stewart along with

William Hearon Esq who has either worked in the same firm as Larry Stewart or

down the hall from him for the last forty years brought suit against Judge Watson

and others The lawsuit was brought in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach

County Florida under the case of Stewart Tilghman Fox amp Bianchi PA William

C Hearon PA and Todd S Stewart PA v Kane amp Kane Laura M Watson

PA et al Case No 502004CA006138XXXXMBAO ie the Attorneys Fees

Litigation

In the Attorneys Fees Litigation the Stewart Lawyers claimed that certain

attorneys including Judge Watson engaged in a myriad of conduct including a

Breach of Fiduciary Duty Constructive Fraud Fraud in the Inducement and

Quantum Meriut Unjust Enrichment The Stewart Lawyers also sought to impose

a Constructive Trust claim against Judge Watson and Watson PA for the

attorneys fees and costs received by the firm

Despite filing the Attorneys Fees Litigation suit in June 2004 Larry Stewart

waited until 2008 to file a complaint with The Florida Bar alleging improper

conduct between 2002- 2004 In 2008 even though Judge Watson was personally

vindicated Judge Crows order was also forwarded to The Florida Bar to consider

whether the 2004 settlement violated any Rules of Professional Conduct The

4

L

matter remained with Bar Counsel and was not assigned to a grievance committee

until four years later in 2012 when Watson decided to run for circuit court judge

The Florida Bar issued its probable cause finding on or about October 22 2012

during the early voting phase of the general election

After Judge Watson was elected to the circuit court the JQC began

investigating Judge Watson and filed its Notice ofFormal Charges in July 2013 for

the alleged misconduct of 2002-2004 claiming that this conduct violated the

Preamble of the Code of Judicial Conduct as well as Canons 1 and_2A

MEMORANDUM OF LAW

SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD

Rule 1510 Florida Rules of Civil Procedure pertaining to summary

judgments provides as follows

The judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings depositions answers to interrogatories and admissions on file together with the affidavits if any show that there is no genuine issue at to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law

The Florida Supreme Court and District Courts of Appeal interpret this rule to

require that once the movant sustains hisher initial burden the opponent has the

burden to come forward with counter-evidence revealing a factual issue The

5

movant need not exclude every possible inference that the opposing party might

have other evidence available to prove his case If the opponent does not come

forward with any affidavit or other proof in opposition to a motion for summary

judgment the movant need only establish a prima facie case whereupon the court

may enter such judgment See Harvey Building Inc v Haley 175 So2d 780 (Fla

1965) Accord Page v Staley 226 So2d 129 (Fla 4th DCA 1969) Turner

Produce Co V Lake Shore 217 So2d 856 (Fla 4th DCA 1969) Proprietors

Insurance Company v Siegel 410 So2d 993 (Fla 3d DCA 1982)

II JUDGE WATSON IS ENTITLED TO PARTIAL SUMMARY

JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW WHERE THE JQC HAS CHARGED HER WITH VIOLATIONS OF THE PREAMBLE AND CANONS 1 AND 2A OF THE CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT FOR

ALLEGED MISCONDUCT WHEN SHE WAS NOT A JUDGE OR ACTING IN A JUDICIAL CAPACITY


investigating Judge Watson and filed its Notice offormal Charges in July 2013 for


Preamble of the Code of Judicial Conduct as well as Canons 1 and_2A The

Florida Supreme Court has unequivocally stated that Canons 1 2 and 3 of the

Code of Judicial Conduct govern the actions of a sitting judge solely and cannot be

applied to a candidate for judge or to a person who is not acting in a judicial

6

capacity In re Kinsey at 85

Judge Kinsey was charged with eleven ethical violations for alleged

misconduct that occurred during her election campaign For each of the eleven

charges brought by the JQC the Commission claimed that Judge Kinseys actions

not only violated Canon 7 of the Code of Judicial Conduct- which governs

lawyers who are candidates for judicial office- but claimed that this same conduct

also violated Canons 1 2 or 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct The Supreme

Court held that these canons do not apply to a judicial candidate

As an initial assertion Judge Kinsey posits that she should not be

found guilty of violating Canon I Canon 2A Canon 3B(5) and Canon 3B(9) because Canon 7 is the only canon applicable to the charges

We agree The Code of Judicial Conduct governs the activities of all

members of the judiciary even those seeking to become members

Canons I 2 and 3 however are directed only to a judge and hence

cannot constitute an independent violation as to a judicial candidate

who is notyet a judge (emphasis added) In re Kinsey at 85

Without any doubt the Supreme Court found that Canons 1 2 and 3 of the Code

of Judicial Conduct only applies to judges as defmed by the Code as Article V

Florida Constitution judges and where applicable those persons performing

judicial functions under the direction or supervision of an Article V judge Fla

Code Jud Conduct Definitions id Though Justice Lewis dissented his opinion

focused on his position that judicial candidates should be held to the same 7

standards as incumbent members of the judiciary

The Code of Judicial Conduct expressly provides that [t]he

Canons and Sections are rules of reason Fla Code Jud Conduct

Preamble Therefore the interests underlying the Canons themselves

must be considered in connection with the issue of whether they apply

to candidates for judicial office as well as sitting judges [3]udges

individually and collectively must respect and honor the judicial

office as a public trust and strive to enhance and maintain confidence

in our legal system Id This principle is no less applicable to judicial candidates than current judges indeed because judicial elections may

represent one of the few times in which the general public directly

scrutinizes the behavior of judges and judicial candidates the entirety

of the standards enunciated in the Code must be followed by both

groups We cannot have and it is totally unworkable and illogical to

have different and multiple standards applicable to candidates for the

same judicial position id at 98

In the Kinsey case not a single Justice suggests that the Code of Judicial Conduct

should apply to the conduct of individuals who are not judges or seeking to

become a member of the judiciary Pursuant to the holding in Kinsey there simply

are no circumstances where alleged misconduct may serve as the underpinning for

discipline of Canons 1 2 andor 3 when the alleged conduct occurs at a time

when that individual is not sitting as a judge or performing judicial functions under

the direction or supervision of an Article V judge

In Judge Kinseys case during the course of her judicial campaign she

8

engaged in a pattern of unethical behavior Because she was a candidate at the time

of the alleged misconduct the JQC initially charged her with violations of Canon 7

as well as violations of Canons 1_2 and 3 for making comments about pending

litigation The Supreme Court ruled that Canons 1 2 and 3 of the Code of Judicial

Conduct did not apply to Judge Kinsey as she was not yet a judge when the acts

were committed Because the alleged misconduct occurred while she was a

candidate for judge and the charges by the JQC were also premised on Canon 7

violations the claims against Judge Kinsey were not set aside as the conduct did

violate Canon 7

Factually it cannot be disputed that Judge Watson was not acting as a judge

or performing any judicial functions whatsoever as defined by the Code of Judicial

Conduct Accordingly as a matter of law Judge Watson cannot be found guilty of

violating the Preamble to the Code or Canons 1 and2A of the Code 2

CONCLUSION

2 A preamble by definition is [a] preliminary statement esp the introduction to a formal document that explains its purpose Websters Il New College Dictionary The Preamble of the Code of Judicial Conduct cannot serve as a basis for disciplinary action As stated in the Preamble [t]he text of the Canons and Sections including the Definitions and Application Sections is authoritative The Commentaryis not intended as a statement of additional rules Preamble Fla Code Jud Conduct

9

Notwithstanding the fact that the allegations contained in the Notice of

Formal Charges are demonstrably false and occurred over ten years ago a circuit

court judge is a constitutional officer with a property right in the office and

constitutional guarantees of substantive and procedural due process and equal

treatment under the law pursuant to the state and federal constitutions This

prosecution not only violates Judge Watsons constitutionally guaranteed rights

but is a transparent effort to use the JQC to impact existing and ongoing litigation

on a pending motion for substantial attorneys fees and costs as well as a pending

Libel and Slander Malicious Prosecution and Abuse of Process civil action

It is undisputed that the JQC is investigating conduct occurring ten years

ago when Judge Watson was a practicing attorney and not a judge was not a

candidate for judicial office and was not performing any judicial function Based

on this alleged misconduct the JQC has claimed that Judge Watson violated the

Preamble and Canons 1 and 2A of the Code of Judicial Conduct The Florida

Supreme Court has stated definitively The Code of Judicial Conduct governs the

activities of all members of the judiciary even those seeking to become members

Canons 1 2 and 3 however are directed only to a judge and hence cannot

constitute an independent violation as to a judicial candidate who is not yet a

judge In re Kinsey at 85 Consequently even when viewed in the light most

10

favorable to the JQC for purposes of summary judgment the facts do not support a

finding of guilt on the part of Judge Watson for any violations of the Preamble and

Canons 1 and 2A of the Code of Judicial Conduct for the alleged misconduct of

Judge Watson when she was a practicing attorney and not a judge and was not

performing any judicial function

WHEREFORE Judge Watson respectfully requests that this Court grant the

Motion for Partial Summary Judgment in favor of Judge Watson and find her not

guilty of the Preamble and Canons 1 and 2A of the Code of Judicial Conduct

Respectfully submitted

The Honorable Laura M Watson Circuit Judge 17th JudiCial CirCuit Room 1005B 201 SE 6th Street Fort Lauderdale Florida 33301 Tel (954) 831-6907 jwatsonl 7thflcourtsorg

s Laura M Watson LAURA M WATSON Florida Bar No 476330

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was

furnished by email to Miles A McGrane III Esq miles(70mcaranelawcom

lisaramcgranelawcomThe McGrane Law Firm Special Counsel One Datran

11

Center Ste 1500 9100 South Dadeland Boulevard Miami Florida 333156 Lauri

Waldman Ross Esq RossGirtenLaurilawcom Counsel to the Hearing Panel of

the JQC Ste 1612 9100 South Dadeland Boulevard Miami Florida 333156

Michael L Schneider Esq mschneiderfloridaiqccom General Counsel l110

Thomasville Road Tallahassee Florida 32303 this 14th day of October 2013

Pursuant to FJQCR Rule 10(b) a copy is furnished by email to The

Honorable Kerry L Evander evanderkficourtsorg Chair of the JQC 300 S

Beach Street Daytona Beach FL 32114

s Laura M Watson LAURA M WATSON

12

BEFORE THE FLORIDA JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION STATE OF FLORIDA

SC13-1333 INQUIRY CONCERNING A JUDGE No 12-613

LAURA M WATSON

AFFIDAVIT OF JUDGE WATSON IN SUPPORT OF HER PARTIAL

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

STATE OF FLORIDA )

)SS

COUNTYOFBROWARD )

BEFORE ME the undersigned authority did personally appear Laura M

Watson who after being duly sworn deposes and says as follows

1 I am over 21 years of age and I have personal knowledge of the facts set

forth in this affidavit I am a circuit court judge serving the citizens of Broward

County Florida In November 20l2 I was elected to the position of circuit court

judge and on January 8 2013 was commissioned by Governor Rick Scott to be

Judge of the Circuit Court Seventeenth Judicial Circuit

2 Since my May 1985 admission to The Florida Bar I have always had the

privilege to practice law and therefore met the constitutional requirements to run

for circuit court judge

3 On July 24 2013 the JQC instituted proceedings against me based on

allegations that alleged conduct of mine which occurred between 2002-2004

violated the Preamble and Canons 1 and 2A of the Code of Judicial Conduct as

well as various alleged violations of the Florida Rules of Professional Conduct

4 Between 2002-2004 the time of the alleged misconduct as set forth in the

Notice ofFormal Charges I was not a judge but was a practicing attorney was not

a candidate for judicial office and was not performing any judicial function I

announced by candidacy for circuit court judge on April l 7 2012

5 The gravamen of the Notice ofFormal Charges is that on or about June 18




and others

6 The lawsuit was brought in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm

Beach County Florida under the case of Stewart Tilghman Fox amp Bianchi PA

William C Hearon PA and Todd S Stewart PA v Kane amp Kane Laura M

Watson PA et al Case No 502004CA006138XXXXMBAO ie the Attorneys

Fees Litigation

7 In the Attorneys Fees Litigation the Stewart Lawyers claimed that

certain attorneys including me engaged in a myriad of conduct including a Breach

of Fiduciary Duty Constructive Fraud Fraud in the Inducement and Quantum

Meriut Unjust Enrichment The Stewart Lawyers also sought to impose a

Constructive Trust claim against me and Laura M Watson and Watson PA for

the attorneys fees and costs received by the firm

8 After a ten week trial all of these claims against me were flatly

rejected by the trial court Judge Crow specifically found that neither I nor Laura

M Watson PA was required to keep any settlement funds in a constructive trust

The individual claims against Laura M Watson were not granted

9 Despite filing the Attorneys Fees Litigation suit in June 2004 Larry

Stewart waited until 2008 to file a complaint with The Florida Bar claiming the

2002-2004 alleged improper conduct

10 The Florida Bar did not begin investigating this matter until 2008 The

Florida Bar never filed formal charges A probable cause finding was issued on or

about October 22 2012 during the early voting phase of the general election

I 1 After I was elected to the circuit court the JQC began investigating

these allegations and filed its Notice of Formal Charges in July 2013 for the

alleged misconduct of 2002-2004 claiming that this conduct violated the Preamble

of the Code of Judicial Conduct as well as Canons 1 and_2A

Under penalties of perjury I declare that I have read the foregoing affidavit

and that the facts stated in it are true and correct

sf Laura M Watson LAURA M WATSON Affiant

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day of ( D2f 2013

before me an officer duly qualified to take acknowledgments personally appeared

d L () SCY7 to me personally known to be the person

described in or produced as identification and who

executed the foregoing instrument and she acknowledged before me that she

executed same that the same is true and correct except as to matters there in stated

to be alleged on information and belief and that as to those matters she believes

them to be true

WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid

this day of ( fD 2P 2013

Notary Public My Commission Expires

USATUCKER MY COMMISSiON f EE 674070 EXPIRESMamh182017

seadtnaugetmaryseres


The Honorable Laura M Watson Circuit Judge 17 Judicial Circuit Room 1005B 20 l SE 6 Street Fort Lauderdale Florida 33301 Tel (954) 831-6907 jwatsonl 7thficourtsorg




furnished by email to Miles A McGrane III Esq milesugravemeuranelawcom

lisameuranelawcom The McGrane Law Firm Special Counsel One Datran


Waldman Ross Esq RossGirten a 1aurilawcom Counsel to the Hearing Panel of


Michael L Schneider Esq mschneideruuml Doridaiqccon General Counsel 1110



Honorable Kerry L Evander mmderk a Dcourtsoru Chair of the JQC 300 S



Slander Malicious Prosecution and Abuse of Process civil action

It is undisputed that the JQC is investigating conduct occurring ten years ago

when Judge Watson was a practicing attorney and not a judge was not a candidate

for judicial office and was not performing any judicial function1 Based on this

alleged misconduct the JQC has claimed that Judge Watson violated the Code of

Judicial Conduct The alleged violations cannot serve as a basis for a violation of


The Florida Supreme Court has stated definitively The Code of Judicial

Conduct governs the activities of all members of the judiciary even those seeking

to become members Canons 1 2 and 3 however are directed only to a judge and

hence cannot constitute an independent violation as to a judicial candidate who is

not yet a judge In re Kinsey 842 So2d 77 85 (Fla 2003) Consequently even

when viewed in the light most favorable to the JQC for purposes of summary

judgment the facts do not support a finding of liability on the part of Judge

Watson for violations of the Preamble and Canons 1 and 2A of the Code of

Judicial Conduct for the alleged misconduct of Judge Watson when she was a

practicing attorney and not a judge was not a candidate for judicial office and

i Though Judge Watson believes that the JQC should stipulate to these facts in an abundance of caution an affidavit setting forth these facts is filed under separate cover and attached hereto

2



















3








Litigation












4

L









MEMORANDUM OF LAW








5



















6













































8









violate Canon 7





CONCLUSION


9




















10
















11










12



LAURA M WATSON



STATE OF FLORIDA )

)SS

COUNTYOFBROWARD )























and others





Fees Litigation































them to be true








































3








Litigation












4

L









MEMORANDUM OF LAW








5



















6













































8









violate Canon 7





CONCLUSION


9




















10
















11










12



LAURA M WATSON



STATE OF FLORIDA )

)SS

COUNTYOFBROWARD )























and others





Fees Litigation































them to be true





























Litigation












4

L









MEMORANDUM OF LAW








5



















6













































8









violate Canon 7





CONCLUSION


9




















10
















11










12



LAURA M WATSON



STATE OF FLORIDA )

)SS

COUNTYOFBROWARD )























and others





Fees Litigation































them to be true






















L









MEMORANDUM OF LAW








5



















6













































8









violate Canon 7





CONCLUSION


9




















10
















11










12



LAURA M WATSON



STATE OF FLORIDA )

)SS

COUNTYOFBROWARD )























and others





Fees Litigation































them to be true








































6













































8









violate Canon 7





CONCLUSION


9




















10
















11










12



LAURA M WATSON



STATE OF FLORIDA )

)SS

COUNTYOFBROWARD )























and others





Fees Litigation































them to be true


































































8









violate Canon 7





CONCLUSION


9




















10
















11










12



LAURA M WATSON



STATE OF FLORIDA )

)SS

COUNTYOFBROWARD )























and others





Fees Litigation































them to be true






























violate Canon 7





CONCLUSION


9




















10
















11










12



LAURA M WATSON



STATE OF FLORIDA )

)SS

COUNTYOFBROWARD )























and others





Fees Litigation































them to be true









































10
















11










12



LAURA M WATSON



STATE OF FLORIDA )

)SS

COUNTYOFBROWARD )























and others





Fees Litigation































them to be true





































11










12



LAURA M WATSON



STATE OF FLORIDA )

)SS

COUNTYOFBROWARD )























and others





Fees Litigation































them to be true































12



LAURA M WATSON



STATE OF FLORIDA )

)SS

COUNTYOFBROWARD )























and others





Fees Litigation































them to be true
























LAURA M WATSON



STATE OF FLORIDA )

)SS

COUNTYOFBROWARD )























and others





Fees Litigation































them to be true


































and others





Fees Litigation































them to be true


















































them to be true






















Sc13-1333 Motion Partial Summary - Florida Supreme … and Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510, hereby files this...

Documents

Transcript of Sc13-1333 Motion Partial Summary - Florida Supreme … and Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510, hereby files this...