The case of Spiegel vs. Dargenson marches on. According to the Docket posted on the Miami-Dade County Clerk of Court’s website as of today, the judged ruled on the Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Contempt Re: Defendant Dargenson’s Response (or Lack Thereof) to Subpoena Deuces Tecum, and Motion to Compel, entered by Ms. Spiegel’s attorney, Joseph S. Geller. Based on the information published, on May 15, 2013, Judge Gayles granted the Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel and deferred the Motion for Contempt.
In plain English, the judge basically told Yve to put on her big girl pants and produce the documents as ordered by the Subpoena. By deferring the Motion for Contempt, I will assume that he’s giving her one more chance to get her act together and comply with the Court’s Order.
I’m also told she will finally sit for her deposition today. Yeah, Baby!
I’m not sure what will happen if she doesn’t comply and the judge does slap her with a Motion for Contempt, but I do know I’ll be LMAO.
One last side note. I direct your attention to the entry on May 14, 2013 entitled Motion to Quash. I will assume this Motion was made by Dargie’s liar, er, I mean lawyer, and that this was his feeble attempt to slap the judge. According to Wikipedia, a Motion to Quash means:
“A motion to quash is a request to a court to render a previous decision of that court or a lower judicial body null or invalid. It can arise out of mistakes made by any lawyer in a court proceeding. A lawyer may file a motion to quash if a mistake has been on the part of a court, or if an attorney believes that the issuance of some court document like a subpoena was not done in a legal manner. For example, a party that receives improper service of process may file a motion to quash.”
Since I don’t have a copy of the Motion yet, I can only guess that Frank Wolland, Esquire is either trying to Quash one of the judge’s prior rulings in this case, or he might be claiming, yet again, that his client didn’t get served. Nice try, Dargie. But, no cigar.
Either way, it does not appear that Judge Gayles ruled on Wolland’s Motion, but he certainly wasted no time ruling on Mr. Geller’s Motions the very next day.
I have a suspicion that Judge Gayles is not to be underestimated. This should prove to be quite the interesting case.
Stephanie Kienzle
“Spreading the Wealth”
