Professor Harold Krent joined Robert to discuss major cases at the U.S. Supreme Court.

Garland v. VanDerStok, (ghost guns) (oral argument).
E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera, (burden of proof in FLSA litigation).
Ames v. Ohio Dep't of Youth Servs., ("majority" plaintiffs burden of proof under Title VII).
United States v. Skrmetti, (medical treatment for transgender children).

Thank You Sponsors

This podcast is supported by Stafi. Stafi provides trained, vetted, and experienced virtual legal assistants and paralegals who will take routine tasks off your plate so you can focus on growing your firm and maximizing revenue. SAVE $500 off your first month with Stafi by using referral code Summarily when you schedule your free initial consultation. Go to getstafi.com/schedule-a-call, select the date and time for your consultation, and enter referral code Summarily on the event details page.

This podcast is also sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Use the link BetterHelp.com/Summarily for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com.

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice. You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer. The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers. This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only. Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

Robert, Lindsey, and Joni recap several recent DCA opinions.

Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Walden, 3DCA (first impression, presuit under section 627.70125, certiorari).
State v. Myers, 3DCA (Miranda).
Pacheco v. Jinete, 3d DCA (residency requirement for elected office).
Beans v. Beans, 1st DCA (modification to alimony).
Julia v. Ramos-Baez, 6DCA (attorneys’ fees under 61.16) (creating split among DCAs).
Cowins v. State, 4th DCA (PTSD; self-defense).

Thank You Sponsors

This podcast is supported by Stafi. Stafi provides trained, vetted, and experienced virtual legal assistants and paralegals who will take routine tasks off your plate so you can focus on growing your firm and maximizing revenue. SAVE $500 off your first month with Stafi by using referral code Summarily when you schedule your free initial consultation. Go to getstafi.com/schedule-a-call, select the date and time for your consultation, and enter referral code Summarily on the event details page.

This podcast is also sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Use the link BetterHelp.com/Summarily for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com.

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice. You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer. The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers. This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only. Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

Adam Unikowsky is a Partner at Jenner & Block. He is at the forefront of thinking about the use of AI in the law. Adam is a graduate of MIT and Harvard Law. He focuses on appellate and Supreme Court practice in the areas of securities litigation, Indian law, patents, civil procedure, and constitutional law.

Check out Adam's substack articles on AI: In AI we Trust (Part 1) & In AI we Trust (Part 2).

Snell v. United Specialty Ins. Co. (11th Cir.)

Thank You Sponsors

This podcast is supported by Stafi. Stafi provides trained, vetted, and experienced virtual legal assistants and paralegals who will take routine tasks off your plate so you can focus on growing your firm and maximizing revenue. SAVE $500 off your first month with Stafi by using referral code Summarily when you schedule your free initial consultation. Go to getstafi.com/schedule-a-call, select the date and time for your consultation, and enter referral code Summarily on the event details page.

This podcast is also sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Use the link BetterHelp.com/Summarily for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com.

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice. You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer. The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers. This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only. Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

Jennifer joined Robert to run throw opinions from June and July.

• Health and Wellness Evolution Co. V. Infinity Auto Ins. Co., 3d DCA (EUO; hearsay).
• Crown Asset Mgmt., LLC v. Bribiesca, 3d DCA (small-claims rules).
• Sch. Bd. of Broward Cnty., FL. v. State Farm Mutual Auto Ins. Co., 4th DCA (reimbursement under section 627.7405).
• Auto Club Ins. Co. of FL. v. Express Care of Belleview, LLC (Eileen Fonti), 5th DCA; Auto Club Ins. Co. of FL. v. Express Care of Belleview, LLC (Helmut J. Meven), 5th DCA (fee schedule).
• USAA Cas. Ins. Co. v. Emergency Res. Grp., et al., 5th DCA (deductible election).

Thank You Sponsors

This podcast is supported by Stafi. Stafi provides trained, vetted, and experienced virtual legal assistants and paralegals who will take routine tasks off your plate so you can focus on growing your firm and maximizing revenue. SAVE $500 off your first month with Stafi by using referral code Summarily when you schedule your free initial consultation. Go to getstafi.com/schedule-a-call, select the date and time for your consultation, and enter referral code Summarily on the event details page.

This podcast is also sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Use the link BetterHelp.com/Summarily for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com.

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice. You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer. The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers. This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only. Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

Professor Harold Krent of the Chicago-Kent College of Law sat down with Robert to discuss the Court's decisions in United States v. Rahimi and Garland v. Cargill, and how Rahimi shows the Court's current iteration of "originalism" does not constrain judges. Rather, it is used as a tool to achieve a desired outcome.

Thank You Sponsors

This podcast is supported by Stafi. Stafi provides trained, vetted, and experienced virtual legal assistants and paralegals who will take routine tasks off your plate so you can focus on growing your firm and maximizing revenue. SAVE $500 off your first month with Stafi by using referral code Summarily when you schedule your free initial consultation. Go to getstafi.com/schedule-a-call, select the date and time for your consultation, and enter referral code Summarily on the event details page.

This podcast is also sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Use the link BetterHelp.com/Summarily for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com.

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice. You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer. The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers. This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only. Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

Robert and Lindsey recap opinions from the DCAs, the Florida Supreme Court, and the 11th Circuit.

• In re: Amends. to Fla. R. Civ. P 1.110.
• In re: Amends. to Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.200, 1.201, 1.280, 1.440, & 1.460.
• In re: Amends to Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510 and New Rule 1.202.
• In re: Amends. to Fla. R. App. P. 9.130.
• BAM Trading Servs., Inc. v. Florida Off. of Fin. Regul., 1st DCA (intra-district conflict); see also A Not-So-Little Problem with Precedent: Intra-District Conflict in Florida District Courts of Appeal, Robert Scavone Jr., et al.
• Ripple v. CBS Corp., FSC (surviving spouse under Florida’s wrongful death act).
• Harrell v. Friend, 1st DCA (modification of timesharing based on substantial change in circumstances).
• Askew v. Fla. Dep’t Child. & Fams., FSC (misapplication jurisdiction).
• Fluhart v. Rasmussen, 5th DCA (preservation; failure to move to vacate magistrate's order).
• Pradaxay v. Kendrick, 6th DCA (med mal presuit; expert's specialty).
• Lange v. Houston Cnty. Ga., 11th Cir. (liability under Title VII for denying gender-affirming care).
• State v. Times, 1st DCA (4th Amendment; knock-and-announce).
• State v. Creller, FSC (Fourth Amendment; traffic stops).

This podcast is supported by Stafi. Stafi provides trained, vetted, and experienced virtual legal assistants and paralegals. SAVE $500 off your first month by using referral code Summarily. Go to getstafi.com/schedule-a-call, select the date/time for your consultation, and enter referral code Summarily on the event details page.

This podcast is also sponsored by BetterHelp. Use the link BetterHelp.com/Summarily for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com.

Robert sat down with Erin Chlopak, Senior Director of Campaign Finance at the Campaign Legal Center, to set the record straight about whether Vice President Harris will be able to use funds raised by the Biden/Harris campaign. Erin also explains why republican threats to sue to prevent VP Harris from using the funds are ill-conceived.

Before joining CLC, Erin spent nearly a decade working on a wide range of campaign finance issues in the Federal Election Commission’s Office of General Counsel. From 2017 to 2018, Erin led the FEC’s Policy Division, overseeing all legal recommendations regarding FEC regulations, advisory opinions, and other legal policy guidance. From 2009 to 2017, Erin served as an attorney and then as assistant general counsel in the FEC’s Litigation Division.

Thank You Sponsors

This podcast is supported by Stafi. Stafi provides trained, vetted, and experienced virtual legal assistants and paralegals who will take routine tasks off your plate so you can focus on growing your firm and maximizing revenue. SAVE $500 off your first month with Stafi by using referral code Summarily when you schedule your free initial consultation. Go to getstafi.com/schedule-a-call, select the date and time for your consultation, and enter referral code Summarily on the event details page.

This podcast is also sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Use the link BetterHelp.com/Summarily for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com.

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice. You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer. The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers. This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only. Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

Robert discussed three important Supreme Court opinions handed down in late June and early July with administrative law experts Professor Harold Krent of the Chicago Kent College of Law, and Professor Lisa Heinzerling, the Justice William J. Brennen Jr. Professor of Law at Georgetown Law.

Hal and Lisa explain how Loper Bright v. Raimondo, SEC v. Jarkesy, and Corner Post v. Board of Governs are likely to change the practice of administrative law.

Our Sponsors

This podcast is supported by Stafi. Stafi provides trained, vetted, and experienced virtual legal assistants and paralegals who will take routine tasks off your plate so you can focus on growing your firm and maximizing revenue. SAVE $500 off your first month with Stafi by using referral code Summarily when you schedule your free initial consultation. Go to getstafi.com/schedule-a-call, select the date and time for your consultation, and enter referral code Summarily on the event details page.

This podcast is also sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Use the link BetterHelp.com/Summarily for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com.

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice. You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer. The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers. This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only. Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.