.png)
Summarily - A Podcast for Busy Lawyers
You're a busy lawyer. Whether trying to hit your billables, being stuck on endless conference calls, or waiting in a crowded courtroom for your case to be called, you don’t have time to stay informed about legal developments important to your practice. Summarily is the podcast for you. Summarily offer caselaw updates, CLEs (Florida), practice tips, and insightful legal commentary.
Pop in your ear buds and tune in. Summarily has you covered.
Listen. Enjoy. Subscribe. Share.
If you have questions, suggestions, or comments please e-mail summarilypod@gmail.com.
DISCLAIMER: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided in 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.
Summarily - A Podcast for Busy Lawyers
The Great Debate: Tanenbaum vs. Scavone
On February 6, Robert debated Judge Adam Tanenbaum (First DCA) about whether the prior-panel rule applies in the DCAs. The rule requires 3-judge appellate panels to follow prior-panel precedent unless the court overrules the prior precedent en banc or the precedent has been overruled by the Florida Supreme Court.
Robert is a proponent of the rule, which he argues flows from Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.331 (the en banc rule) and is supported by Florida Supreme Court precedent.
Judge Tanenbaum is an opponent of the rule, which he argues has no basis in law and is contrary to article V, section 4(a) of Florida's Constitution.
Robert co-authored an article in The Florida Bar Journal explaining his position. Judge Tanenbaum's position is best articulated in his concurring opinions in Normandy Ins. Co. v. Bouayad, 372 So. 3d 671 (Fla. 1st DCA 2023) (en banc), review granted, No. SC2023-1576, 2024 WL 4449458 (Fla. Oct. 9, 2024) and BAM Trading Servs. Inc. v. Off. of Fin. Regul., 395 So. 3d 687 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024) (en banc).
Thanks to the Hillsborough County Bar Association for hosting the event and to David Costello of the Florida Office of the Attorney General and Dimitri Peteves of Creed and Gowdy P.A. for an amazing job organizing and moderating the debate.
Please 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.
