Scribd Logo
Загрузить

Добро пожаловать в Scribd!

  • Fraud On The Court

    Загружено:

    marc47
    572 просмотров2 страницы
    Fraud on the court occurs when a party deliberately misrepresents or fails to disclose a pertinent fact relating to their own claim, interfering with the court's ability to impartially adjudicate the matter. Courts have the inherent authority to dismiss a case with prejudice for fraud on the court in order to preserve the integrity of the judicial system. Dismissal with prejudice is reserved for the most serious misconduct, such as deliberately lying about central issues like the nature and extent of injuries. Mere oversight or forgetfulness does not rise to the level of fraud on the court, which requires clear and convincing evidence of an unconscionable scheme to improperly influence the trier of fact or hamper the opposing party.

    Исходное описание:

    Оригинальное название

    Fraud on the Court

    Авторское право

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Доступные форматы

    PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

    Этот документ был вам полезен?

    Это неприемлемый материал?

    Пожаловаться на этот документ
    Fraud on the court occurs when a party deliberately misrepresents or fails to disclose a pertinent fact relating to their own claim, interfering with the court's ability to impartially adjudicate the matter. Courts have the inherent authority to dismiss a case with prejudice for fraud on the court in order to preserve the integrity of the judicial system. Dismissal with prejudice is reserved for the most serious misconduct, such as deliberately lying about central issues like the nature and extent of injuries. Mere oversight or forgetfulness does not rise to the level of fraud on the court, which requires clear and convincing evidence of an unconscionable scheme to improperly influence the trier of fact or hamper the opposing party.

    Авторское право:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Скачайте в формате PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd
    Отметить как неприемлемый контент
    572 просмотров2 страницы

    Fraud On The Court

    Загружено:

    marc47
    Fraud on the court occurs when a party deliberately misrepresents or fails to disclose a pertinent fact relating to their own claim, interfering with the court's ability to impartially adjudicate the matter. Courts have the inherent authority to dismiss a case with prejudice for fraud on the court in order to preserve the integrity of the judicial system. Dismissal with prejudice is reserved for the most serious misconduct, such as deliberately lying about central issues like the nature and extent of injuries. Mere oversight or forgetfulness does not rise to the level of fraud on the court, which requires clear and convincing evidence of an unconscionable scheme to improperly influence the trier of fact or hamper the opposing party.

    Авторское право:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Скачайте в формате PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd
    Отметить как неприемлемый контент
    из 2

    FraudontheCourtWillNotGoUnpunished ByCamilleJ.IurilloandGinaM.Pellegrino Inkeepingwiththethemeof thismonthsParaclete,wewantedtoshareatopic withyouthattrulydoesensurelibertyunderthelaw.Thattopicisfraudon thecourt. Scenario:Duringdiscovery,apartyprovidesfalseormisleadingtestimony by deliberatelymisrepresentingorfailingtodiscloseapertinentfact,whichdirectlyrelates tothepartysownclaim. Issuchmisconductdeemedfraudonthecourt,andif so,doesa trialcourthavetheauthoritytodismissthecase? Partieslitigatingmustdisclosefactstruthfully,inordertopreservetheintegrityof thelitigationprocessinourjudicialsystem.Itisclearthatasystemthatdependsonan adversarysabilitytouncoverfalsehoodsisdoomedforfailure.

    Coxv.Burke,706 th So.2d43,47(Fla.5 DCA1998).Furthermore,therighttoseekredressinacourtof lawisasmuchaprivilegeofcitizenshipasarightandcanbeforfeited. JohnT. Kolinski,FraudontheCourtasaBasisforDismissalwithPrejudiceorDefault,78Feb Fla.B.J.16(2004).Byprovidingfalsetestimonyduringdiscovery,apartycanforfeit theirrighttohavetheircaseheard,ifthecourtrulestodismissthecasewithprejudice. See,Cox,706So.2dat47(holdingthatthelowercourtdidnotabuseitsdiscretionwhen itdismissedappellantscase,whereinappellantgavefalseormisleadinganswersduring discovery). Dismissingacasewithprejudiceisasanctionthatisordinarilyreservedforthe mostseriouscivillitigationmisconduct. Kolinski,supra.Generallyspeaking, misconductcanbecharacterizedaseitherproceduralmisconductorsubstantive misconduct. Anexampleofproceduralmisconductiswhereapartywillfullydisobeysor repeatedlyrefusestocomplywithacourtorderwhereas,anexampleof substantive misconductiswhereapartyliesaboutpertinentfactsdirectlyrelatingtotheircase,such asthenatureandextentofthepartysinjuries. See,DiStefanov.StateFarmMut.Auto. st Ins.Co.,846So.2d572,574(Fla.1 DCA2003)(affirmingthetrialcourtsdismissal withprejudice,whereinappellantgavefalsetestimonyduringdiscovery concerningfacts directlyrelatingtocentralissuesinappellantscase). Generallyspeaking,substantive misconductislikely toresultin dismissalwithprejudiceasasanctionbecausesuch behaviorclearlyevidencesablatantdisregardforthejudicialprocess. Kolinski,supra. Inorderformisconducttorisetotheleveloffraudonthecourt,itmustbe willfullyordeliberatelyegregious. Forinstance,amisrepresentationduringdiscovery thatistheresultofapartysmereoversightorforgetfulnessdoesnotrisetothelevelof fraudonthecourt. See,DiStefano,846So.2dat575.Fraudonthecourt,whichmustbe provenbyclearandconvincingevidence,occurswhereapartyhassentientlysetin motionsomeunconscionableschemecalculatedtointerferewiththejudicialsystems abilityimpartially toadjudicateamatterbyimproperlyinfluencingthetrieroffactor unfairlyhamperingthepresentationoftheopposingpartysclaimordefense. Cox,706 st So.2dat46(quotingAoudev.MobilOilCorp.,892F.2d1115,1118(1 Cir.1989)).

    Accordingtotheapplicablecaselaw,atrialcourthastheinherentauthority, basedonsoundjudicialdiscretion,todismissanaction withprejudiceforfraudonthe th court. See,Kornblumv.Schneider,609So.2d138,139(Fla.4 DCA1992).Ifthe misconductissufficientenoughtobedeemedfraudonthecourt,thesanctionof dismissalwithprejudicewillrarelybereversedbyanappellatecourtonappeal. Kolinski,supra. Inconclusion,dismissingacasewithprejudiceistypicallyreservedforthemost extrememisconductbecauseittakesawayonesrighttohavetheircaseadjudicatedina courtoflaw.Nevertheless,fraudonthecourtisseriousmisconductbecauseitinvolves deliberatelyegregiousbehavior,makingamockeryofourjudicial system,which relies uponthetruthfuldisclosureoffacts.Inorder topreservetheintegrityofoursystem,a party cannotpurposefullymisrepresentorfailtodiscloseapertinentfactthatdirectly relatestothepartysownclaim,withouttheramificationofthemostseveresanction.

    Iurillo&Associates,P.A.,locatedindowntownSt.Petersburg,iscomprisedof Camille J.Iurillo,Shareholder,GinaM.Pellegrino,Associate,andSabrinaC.Beavens,asOf Counsel. Ms.IurillohasbeenactiveintheSt.PetersburgBarAssociationforseveral years,includinghercurrentpositionasPresidentElect.Inaddition,sheisamemberof theBoardofDirectorsoftheSt.PetersburgBarFoundationandtheChairofTheFlorida BarsPracticeManagementandDevelopmentSection. Ms. PellegrinojoinedtheFirm inthesummerof2006andisamemberoftheSt.PetersburgBarAssociation. Theprimaryareasofpracticeof Iurillo&Associates,P.A. areCommercialand BankruptcyLitigationandDebtors/CreditorsRights.

    Вам также может понравиться