Thompson v. The Florida Bar

Filing 215

RESPONSE to Motion re 214 Plaintiff's MOTION to Strike Kent from Court's E-mail Listing Intervenor's Notice to Court filed by Norman Elliott Kent. Replies due by 10/22/2007. (Kent, Norman)

Thompson v. The Florida Bar

Doc. 215

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION CASE NO. 07-21256-CIV-JORDAN

JOHN B.THOMPSON, vs. The FLORIDA BAR, et.al., Defendants. ______________________/

) ) ) )

Notice to Court Comes now the undersigned, Norman Elliott Kent, as a Proposed Intervenor, admitted to practice in the Southern District and represents to this Court as follows: 1. In light of the Court's Omnibus Order of this date providing for the undersigned to receive a copy of the

Plaintiff's offensive filings and documents, which gave rise to this Court's first rule to show cause; and further, 2. In light of that same order denying the Plaintiff an opportunity to further amend this complaint belatedly so as to improperly include the undersigned as a party defendant; The proposed Intervenor, therefore, graciously accepts this court's ruling, asking only that this court reserve for its further sua sponte review whether or not it becomes appropriate to refer the Plaintiff's continuing

unprofessional conduct to a disciplinary committee of this court.
1

Dockets.Justia.com

For example, within moments of this court's Omnibus Order being posted electronically in this case file, the Plaintiff filed a pleading again using the protection of this judicial proceeding to savage the undersigned and the defendant Florida Bar. Then, in a subsequent filing, the Plaintiff falsely accused the undersigned of working

"regularly" with a Florida Bar prosecutor, which I would proffer under oath, is simply an outright lie, with no basis in fact. No court should ever have to tolerate such

disrespectful conduct from any litigant, let alone from a person who boasts how he has been a lawyer for thirty one years. Were he only to behave like one for a single day. Few places afford attorneys such a forum for graceful advocacy as the courtrooms of our United States District Courts. How proud I am to have practiced therein, also for 30 years. So has Mr. Richard, I suspect. As this court has noted numerous times, this case is about a disciplinary proceeding about one person and one person only. It is easy to see why. The Plaintiff could have been used this forum for

innovative and scholarly argument on the propriety of Bar disciplinary authority, advocates. Instead, as one of his would be victims, I have born witness from a distance to an unabated series of
2

procedures, and the

the

extent

of

the

Bar's

legal of

federal

constitutional

rights

inexcusable,

unprofessional,

unacceptable,

ad

hominem

attacks, not only upon myself, but upon the participants of this cause of action and unrelated lawyers who have

distinguished themselves personally and professionally in our community, from Mr. Chaykin to Mr. Kuehne. As our rules of professional conduct, at 4-8.4 point out, this type of advocacy has no place in our courts, and it should not be tolerated by our Bar. It explains why Mr. Thompson is a defendant in a Bar proceeding in the first place. Graciously having been afforded by this Honorable Court the relief I sought, and asking it to reserve such further actions as it deems appropriate, I respectfully conclude my appearance herein. Respectfully submitted, Norman Elliott Kent 800 East Broward Blvd. Suite 310 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Florida Bar No. 271969 954 763 1900 Telefax 954 763 4792 [e-mail]

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was filed electronically with the Clerk of the Court, to all parties in this cause utilizing the CM/ECF Pacer System of the United States District Court, including

3

Barry Richard, Katrina Sharpe, John B. Thompson, and Charles Fahlbusch. By Norman Elliott Kent 800 E. Broward Blvd., Suite 310 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 [e-mail] 954-763-1900 Fla. Bar No.: 271969

4