Connect with us


What’s Your Day Job Judge Marni Bryson is Asked While Under Judicial Investigation

Palm Beach County Judge Marni Bryson was charged in April with violating judicial canons that require judges to work fulltime.



Accusations against judge of sexting, nude photos, burglary emerge in lawsuit

JUL 1, 2021 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: SEP 5, 2021

When Palm Beach County Judge Marni Bryson was charged in April with violating judicial canons that require judges to work fulltime, it wasn’t her first brush with controversy.

Almost exactly two years earlier, she filed a $10 million lawsuit against politically powerful Fort Lauderdale lawyer William Scherer, accusing him of trying to extort her by threatening to release nude photos of her.

The cases threaten both Bryson’s personal and professional life along with the reputations of Scherer and others who have been dragged into the salacious legal fray.

While one dispute played out quietly as judicial watchdogs engaged in behind-the-scenes talks with unnamed sources about Bryson’s attendance record, the other exploded into public view.

Detailed in court records, it exposes the personal lives of a prominent Broward County land-use attorney, her ex-husband, a well-known political consultant who was married to Bryson, and, of course, Bryson herself.

But, despite the sordid allegations of sexting or less-scintillating accusations that she failed to show up for work, the 47-year-old two-term jurist shows no sign of backing down from the legal fights against powerful people and institutions.

Already, she has won key battles.

A Treasure Coast circuit judge, who is presiding over the extortion case after Palm Beach County judges recused themselves, ruled Bryson can seek punitive damages against Scherer on her claims of intentional affliction of emotional distress. The decision is being appealed.

Further, Bryson persuaded attorney Mayanne Downs, a member of the Judicial Qualifications Commission, to recuse herself because she is close friends with Chief Palm Beach County Judge Krista Marx.

In court papers, Bryson’s attorney said he plans to call Marx’s credibility into question when the six-member panel meets in November to weigh allegations that Bryson “failed to devote full time and attention to your judicial duties” from 2016 through 2019. Bryson is also accused of failing to report her absences to Marx.


Still, despite the recent wins, attorneys representing Scherer and the JQC claim that Bryson is waging quixotic battles.

The JQC’s case doesn’t depend on Marx’s testimony, attorney Henry M. Coxe III said in court papers filed on behalf of the agency that reviews complaints against state judges.

Data and other witnesses will show that Bryson “was often absent from her designated court facility,” he wrote.

‘Even John Grisham’s best work of fiction’

Likewise, attorney Javier Lopez, who represents Scherer, said Bryson’s case is doomed.

“What has become apparent is that Ms. Bryson seems to have a tortured relationship with the truth,” he said. “Her complaint against Mr. Scherer is something that even John Grisham’s best work of fiction would have a hard time competing with.”

Attorney Paul Turner, who represents Bryson, said such remarks are typical of Scherer’s effort to vilify his client, who served as an assistant state attorney general, an assistant public defender and was in private practice before being first elected in 2010.

“Everything Judge Bryson has said is true and the defendants can’t get around it,” he said in a statement.

“They don’t like the truth, they don’t like the facts, they don’t like that they are on the hook for punitive damages now, and they don’t like that they couldn’t scare my client into remaining silent.”

Like the focus on the nude photos, the verbal assaults are an attempt to taint Bryson and obscure her motives, he said.

“They continually attack her to draw attention away from what she really is, a mother who was protecting her child,” Turner said.

It all started with a child-visitation dispute

By any measure, the underlying allegations in the lawsuit could be plucked from a cheesy bestseller or a country song.

The dispute began with allegations of infidelity, which led to divorce, acrimony, jealousy and despair.


From there, it spun out of control.

Concerned that her ex-husband, Blake MacDiarmid, hadn’t visited their infant son for months, Bryson in 2015 headed back to court to try to change their child-sharing agreement.

Bryson had been married to MacDiarmid less than a year and had just given birth when the campaign consultant began staying out late at night, claiming he was meeting with candidates, she claims.

After the 2014 divorce, he stopped picking up their son for visitation. Bryson said she wanted to change the agreement so she could limit his access to his child, who wouldn’t recognize his father and would be traumatized if he took him.

Subpoena for her ex-husband’s girlfriend?

To prove MacDiarmid’s absences, Bryson said she wanted to subpoena his then-girlfriend, Stephanie Toothaker, a Democratic fundraiser and legal adviser who was flirting with a congressional bid.

The Fort Lauderdale land use and government relations attorney could testify that MacDiarmid was with her when he was supposed to be taking care of his son, Bryson said.

William Scherer was once an attorney for former Florida Gov. Rick Scott.

When she received a notice of the subpoena, Toothaker went to Scherer, who specializes in complex business litigation, represented George Bush in his 2000 recount fight and is considered a Republican kingmaker.

Claiming she feared Bryson, Toothaker asked Scherer to block the subpoena and any other legal action Bryson was planning.

Scherer claims his investigation led him to believe that Toothaker and her estranged husband and Bryson and her ex-husband were in a twisted “love rectangle.”

He said he “was provided” nude photos Bryson allegedly sent to Toothaker’s soon-to-be ex-husband, Peter Kemp, and text messages he believed Bryson sent MacDiarmid, threatening to kill Toothaker.

He also had a copy of a report Toothaker filed with Fort Lauderdale police, claiming Bryson had broken into her house.

There also was an anonymous letter that Toothaker believed Bryson sent to her law partners, Broward County commissioners and officials at her private club. The letter detailed her affair with MacDiarmid and other indiscretions that the letter writer said would soon be released to the media.

With that information in hand, Scherer said, he called West Palm Beach attorney Jack Scarola for a chat. He said he thought Scarola, who he’d known for years, represented Bryson.

Scherer said his purpose was pure.

“I said it would be embarrassing to all four of them, both husbands and both wives, because I described it to him as a very messy, nasty two-year … love rectangle of sorts,” Scherer said during a deposition.

“I wasn’t going to Mr. Scarola and blaming his client any more than I was trying to exonerate mine,” he continued. “I was trying to get them to stand down and that was the purpose of the meeting with Mr. Scarola.”

But, when Scarola told Bryson about what Scherer said at the meeting, she didn’t believe Scherer was trying to stop four people from hurting each other.


‘Faced with being publicly humiliated’

Knowing she was facing a re-election campaign, Scherer was threatening to release the photo and the police report if she didn’t drop her plans to use Toothaker to protect her young son, Bryson said.

“I was faced with being publicly humiliated by him and this purported photo as well as an allegation of a burglary I knew nothing about,” she said during a deposition. “I was in the middle of an election where any of this news would have not only been a local media sensation but perhaps a national media sensation.”

She said the only nude photo she sent to any man was to MacDiarmid when she was taking pictures to chronicle her pregnancy.

When Lopez pointed out that Kemp had testified that she texted him the photo and he had shared it with Toothaker, Bryson’s response was unequivocal.

“He’s lying,” she said.

Stephanie Toothaker, a lawyer with the Fort Lauderdale firm Tripp Scott, considered a run as a Democratic candidate for Congress in 2016.

She said he was also lying when he testified that she danced topless when she called him on a video chat. While he also received a photo of a vagina he shared with Toothaker, he said he didn’t believe it came from Bryson who he texted with regularly in 2014.

Bryson further denied that she ever threatened Toothaker. A text message that Lopez claims she sent to MacDiarmid included a reference to a violent rap song that was labeled “for your GF.”

“I will kill her. And her Falcon nose,” it continued.

Bryson said she didn’t remember sending the text to MacDiarmid and her ex-husband’s claims that she did were dubious at best.

“Just because Blake says it’s from me doesn’t mean it’s from me,” she said. “As we know, Blake’s had some problems in the past as far as being truthful.”

Still, Bryson acknowledged, she may have made some disparaging remarks about Toothaker.

“I don’t recall saying that she had a falcon nose,” she said during a deposition. “But I’m sure I said many mean things about her at that period of time. I was very angry.”

Attorney didn’t think it was a threat

But, Lopez said, a bigger problem for Bryson is that Scarola doesn’t share her view of the purpose of Scherer’s visit.

During the roughly half-hour meeting at his West Palm Beach office, Scarola said he didn’t believe Scherer was threatening Bryson.

“We did not talk about matters that I personally viewed as an extortion attempt,” Scarola said in a signed affidavit. “The thrust of the conversation was that this situation was messy and would not reflect well on anyone involved.”

Scherer never threatened to release the nude photos or any of the other documents he had gathered against Bryson, Scarola said.

Instead, Scherer explained that he believed the release of the damaging information was inevitable if Bryson pursued plans to have Toothaker testify in the custody dispute. Scherer also mentioned the impact that could have on Bryson’s judicial career, Scarola said.

But, Scarola insisted, he didn’t think Scherer was trying to use him to threaten Bryson. Instead, Scarola said he viewed it as an opportunity to help Bryson, whom he’d supported in her judicial campaigns.

“The only remorse I felt was that Judge Bryson was having to deal with the emotional trauma of protecting herself and her child in a legal battle that seemed to be devolving at the hands of her former husband into increasingly lower levels of nastiness,” he said. “Mr. Scherer did not threaten to obstruct Judge Bryson’s pending litigation.”

While questioning Bryson, Lopez insisted that Scarola’s statement destroys the crux of her case against Scherer. The only person who could testify that Scherer threatened Bryson is Scarola, who claims it didn’t happen, he said.

Bryson disagreed. “It’s my testimony as to what (Scarola) said to me, what was relayed to me, what I took away from that conversation,” she said. “I’m not calling him a liar as to his personal recollection.

“What he writes is his personal opinion or personal memory of something,” she continued. “My memory contradicts him. I’m not calling him a liar. Okay?”

The bigger question, her attorneys said, is why Scherer went to Scarola to talk about Bryson’s plan to call Toothaker to testify in the custody dispute instead of talking to the divorce lawyer who was representing her.

Scherer said he contacted Scarola because he understood the lawyer he had known for years was representing Bryson in a separate lawsuit he was told she planned to file against Toothaker.


Scherer acknowledged that Scarola told him he wasn’t representing Bryson and knew nothing about her ongoing domestic strife. But, Scherer said, he also understood Scarola had represented Bryson before.

“I felt that his involvement would help resolve what I believed to be a very nasty dispute that ought to be resolved,” Scherer said.

In court papers, Bryson’s attorneys said Scherer was obligated to talk to Bryson’s divorce lawyer, who was handling the custody dispute.

When the case goes to trial, they said, they plan to call an expert witness to testify that Scherer’s decision to sidestep Bryson’s divorce lawyer was a violation of professional rules of conduct.

Scherer’s attorney said they will call their own expert who will testify that he did the right thing.

For his part, Scherer said his plan worked.

“After that meeting, all these hostilities basically stopped,” he said. “So, you know, up to the time of the lawsuit against me almost four years later, I thought I had really done a good job for these people.”

‘Is he going to do it again?’

But, Bryson said, she was haunted by what happened.

While she ultimately got the child-custody agreement changed without calling Toothaker to testify, it wasn’t easy.

She was forced to undergo a paternity test after MacDiarmid claimed he wasn’t the boy’s father. After the test came back positive, he agreed she could control when he could see their son. He has never asked to do so, she said in the deposition.

Still, she worried about what Scherer might do if custody issues surface in the future.

“Is he going to do it again?” she asked.

Also, she said, she had growing concerns that Scherer might decide to use the information he gathered against her for other purposes.

“What’s going to happen if he has a personal interest in one of the cases that I’m handling as a judge?” she said. “Is he going to do it again?”

“This person cannot get away with it,” she said. “It shouldn’t have happened to me. It shouldn’t happen to anybody.”

That’s why, in 2019, she decided to file the suit.


But, the years-long delay has hurt both sides.

Emails and texts have been deleted. Memories have faded.

When Kemp and Toothaker were deposed, they said they couldn’t remember much of what transpired.

Kemp said he had blocked the memories of what was a dark period in his life. Although he and Toothaker divorced, they remain friendly and often vacation together with their son, he said.

Shortly after the lawsuit was filed, Bryson learned she was under investigation by the JQC, according to court papers filed by Coxe, who is representing the agency.

In her response to the allegations, she claims she worked hard. While serving in county criminal court, handling misdemeanor offenses, she volunteered to help circuit judges by presiding over felony trials, including murder cases.

Her pace continued when she was moved to the south county courthouse to handle minor civil cases, such as evictions, said attorney Scott Richardson, who represented Bryson before he was replaced by lawyer Robert Watson.

However, in 2019, she was plagued by serious health problems, including a ruptured appendix. Despite that, she cleared more cases than her predecessor, he said.

Further, Richardson said, there is no rule that dictates how many hours a judge must work or whether they are prohibited from working from home.

He accused the JQC of engaging in “selective prosecution, leading to a biased and discriminatory result.”

Whether the lawsuit Bryson filed against Scherer spurred the JQC investigation is unknown. Lopez said there could be a connection.

Even if there is, Bryson said, she has no regret about filing the lawsuit which she views as necessary to protect her son. Scherer needs to be held accountable, she said.

“He’s disgusting and reprehensible and everyone should know about it,” she said of Scherer. “I’m done. I’m done playing this game.”


• Continue to provide this website, content, resources, community and help center for free to the many homeowners, residents, Texans and as we’ve expanded, people nationwide who need access without a paywall or subscription.

• Help us promote our campaign through marketing, pr, advertising and reaching out to government, law firms and anyone that will listen and can assist.

Thank you for your trust, belief and support in our conviction to help Floridian residents and citizens nationwide take back their freedom. Your Donations and your Voice are so important.

Editors Choice

A Message for Felon Francis Santa: We Cannot Be Bribed. Stop the Harassment

Once a person has been convicted of a felony, he or she can be considered a felon for life, according to the strict meaning of the word.



Dear Santa…..

DEC. 12., 2022

We’ve set aside your plethora of harassing emails and bribes for many months. Indeed, we have never contacted the ex-wife below, who is desperate to provide more unfavorable information about you, Francis “Frank” Santa.

But now your emails are becoming both incessant and threatening, which means we have to publish all the information for our own safety.

You are a convicted felon Francis “Frank” Santa. Considering your stalking behavior, that makes you a very dangerous and untrustworthy person.

We are stating in this public forum: cease and desist from your writings, threats and stop tryin’ to bribe us with “donations”  – which are not donations as they are based on LIF and LIT removing an article about you, which is based on the real truth, no bull.

And remember Francis Santa, you are the one who came charging at us with a takedown request for the Ringel’s, indicted in NYC.

In return, all we did was google you and your business to find out who we were dealin’ with.

That’s when we discovered the information about your criminal past, which was recovered from publicly accessible information.

LIF and LIT didn’t ‘destroy’ you Frank, you did that all by yourself.

May 17, 2022


Francis Santa



I am coming hat in hand to you for help.


Dear Sir/Madam,

I am sincerely and humbly asking you for help. I do not know who I upset to find myself being personally punished on your website but there my be a good reason for which an apology on my part may be need.

If I have wronged someone there I am deeply sorry.

I am a spiritual person and have worked very hard to get to where I am in my life after having my world destroyed 11 years ago.

I have changed and I take responsibility for all my past issues, but more important to me now in life is that if I have done something to someone to offended them even without knowing why, I apologize and more forward.

Please contact me back by email or phone (305)967-3168 so I can make amends.

I do know who has so much dislike for me and took the time to hurt my wife, children and grandchildren and me and but I must have hurt them deeply for the posting to be put up about me.

Last, please understand I am not asking for sympathy or asking you to remove it.

If I have harmed someone in the last 6 years and I am wrong for something I personal did then I deserve it but also if I did nothing I don’t.

Again, please contact me and tell me what I have to do to make things right and discuses this.

Very Respectfully,


Jun 9, 2022


Francis Santa



Need your help


Dear Sir/Madam,

I sent an email to and did not receive a response.

I really need your help, please see attached.


Jul 22, 2022





Francis Frank Santa


I read with great interest your article on my former spouse – what you don’t know is that Mr. Santa is currently in arrears for child support in the amount of $196,000.

I can provide documentation for proof.

I find it quite amusing that this man cries poor mouth, continues to hide assets, resides in a gated community in Boca Raton and has started this bogus foundation.

Leopards do not change their spots –

You do realize he also spent 5 of a 15 year bid in NYS prison for a credit repair scam in which he stole 2.5 MILLION; was prosecuted by DA Morgenthau’s office and was ultimately released to the state of Florida for his parole and probation.

Probation doesn’t give a rat’s ass about what he is doing.

Child Support enforcement doesn’t give a rats ass and good luck trying to get in touch with someone.

I will never see that money he owes – – I can’t even get a life insurance policy on him – something he was to provide for his FIRST born – not the other children he has – one of which is a convicted counterfeitter.

I encourage LIF to contact me.

October 13, 2022


Francis Santa



Need your help ( )


I sent you an email many months ago.

I have put my life back together.

The past 11 years I have paid dearly for what happen.

My family has suffered the most because of the issue.

As for myself I feel that what I went threw changed me and made me a better person and took me off a bad path.

I am trying so hard to move on.

Your article about me is destroying my family.

Please contact me back to see if you can help me in some way to remove or de-index this.

I do understand that you spent a tremendous in research and time posting this.

I have no problem paying and administrative fees that you need.

I am coming to you with hat in hand for your help

Where Is He Now? Fraudster Francis Santa Was Sentenced to 88 Months for Conspiracy



December 1, 2022

Donor Comment: I wanted to donate more and will each month when I have extra money.

December 1, 2022

Donor Comment: I would like to also advertise with you.

December 8, 2022


francis santa where is he now


the former mrs santa <>

Submitted on: Dec 8, 2022 at 20:26


the former mrs santa



francis santa where is he now



ha ha now he is offering a scholarship???

lol scam people into giving money to his “foundation” that isn’t a 501c3 – so he can give it to “other” charities. Why don’t I just donate to them myself and get the tax write off?

are people that stupid?

December 8, 2022










December 12, 2022

 I am waiting patiently to talk to you regarding your posting on LIF.  I am being as respectful as I can at this time.

 I know you own the site along with LIT and you are responsible for the posting.

You have turned my life upside down for no reason.  The internet can be very cruel.

I have suffered enough with my family and you have put my life in danger.

I could understand if I did something wrong but that is not the case.

Please remove the posting or de-index it from the search engines.  I am not the only person you did this to for no reason.

 What I find interesting is that you are a media company helping people and you are also a company that destroys people.

Do your clients know this?

All I want is for you to remove the posting.

You have hurt me for more than 9 months.

I think that you made your point (whatever it was)

Donor Comment: Thank you

Boca man pleads guilty to conspiring to bribe bankers and fake financial documents

AUG 9, 2011 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: APR 22, 2022

WEST PALM BEACH — The owner of a Boca Raton company pleaded guilty Wednesday to conspiring to bribe local bankers and falsify financial documents to secure more than $1.5 million in fraudulent small business loans and lines of credit.

Francis Santa admitted orchestrating what federal prosecutors have described as an unique form of fraud: enlisting corrupt bankers to approve business loans for clients with poor credit histories. Santa and his employees at Palm Beach Business Consultants attempted to push through more than $10 million in bogus loans and lines of credit since the firm opened in 2003, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

After federal authorities caught on to Santa’s scheme, he began working with them and agreed to introduce an undercover FBI agent to the bankers. The sting culminated in January with the arrests of 15 people, including Santa, a Broward Schools assistant principal, a former Broward Sheriff’s investigative aide and seven Broward and Palm Beach bankers.


• Continue to provide this website, content, resources, community and help center for free to the many homeowners, residents, Texans and as we’ve expanded, people nationwide who need access without a paywall or subscription.

• Help us promote our campaign through marketing, pr, advertising and reaching out to government, law firms and anyone that will listen and can assist.

Thank you for your trust, belief and support in our conviction to help Floridian residents and citizens nationwide take back their freedom. Your Donations and your Voice are so important.

Continue Reading

Fake Documents

Florida Clerks Want to Stop Property Deed Scammers, Unlike Texas Where the Judiciary are the Scammers

On our main website at LIT ( we’ve been publishing the real facts about corrupt lawyers, judges and Texas citizens involved in fraudulent deeds.



Northeast Florida Clerks of Court team up against property and mortgage fraud

Clerks in Baker, Clay, Duval, Nassau, Putnam & St. Johns urge residents to sign up for free fraud alert services

OCT 24, 2022 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: OCT 25, 2022

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. – The Clerks of Court for Baker, Clay, Duval, Nassau, Putnam and St. Johns counties want the residents they serve to take advantage of free property fraud alert services offered by each of their offices.

The clerks joined forces Monday to urge property owners to protect themselves against scammers who would steal their homes, vacant land or business property through fraudulent deeds or other official records.

“Property and identity fraud are national and local problems that can have a serious impact,” said Putnam County Clerk Matt Reynolds. “By taking advantage of this service offered by the Clerk of Circuit Court and Comptroller’s Office, citizens can get ahead of fraud and protect the things we have all worked so hard to achieve.”

Reynolds and Clerks Stacie D. Harvey, Tara S. Green, Jody Phillips, John A. Crawford and Brandon J. Patty launched a regional campaign to highlight a shared webpage that provides property fraud signup links in all six counties.

The webpage is accessible through both and

“Northeast Florida Clerks are united to fight property fraud across the region, as criminals don’t stop at the county line,” said St. Johns County Clerk Patty.

Property fraud is when someone illegally uses your property for financial gain. A common example is when a scammer creates a fraudulent document that will deed your home to them and then records that document in a county’s official records.

“We are now seeing instances where your home and property can be digitally stolen from you by the filing of a fraudulent deed by scammers miles and miles away,” said Baker County Clerk Harvey.

But property owners themselves can easily discern if ownership of their home or business has been modified — if they are notified that a change has occurred.

“Receiving notifications that something may be amiss is the first step to fighting back. We encourage all property owners to register for this free service that your Clerks have implemented for your protection,” said Nassau County Clerk Crawford, who recently launched the county’s new property fraud alert service.

To combat the nationwide rise in property and mortgage fraud, identity protection companies charge monthly or annual fees to monitor your official records. But your local Clerk of Court offers a free do-it-yourself option — simply subscribe to receive alerts when an official record document is recorded in your name(s) with that office.

“We ask property owners to partner with us, as we work to eliminate the attempts to steal homes and land,” said Clay County Clerk Green. “Bad actors might get away with a fraudulent filing, but an alert sent to a registered property owner will quickly follow that allows the property owner to intervene.”

Like paid commercial alert systems, the free noticing service does not prevent a fraudulent action from occurring.

As a county’s recorders of deeds and mortgages, Clerks of Court document property records but are not authorized to determine the validity of the record.

“Although the notification won’t stop the fraudulent transaction, it will give the property owners the opportunity to right the wrong before it’s too far gone!” Harvey said.

Local realtor Jonathan Daugherty, since 2009, says he’s gotten calls about home that were not for sale.

He thinks the alert system will help homeowners.

“I think it’s a great tool and it sounds like it’s pretty easy for people to do,” said Realtor Jonathan Daugherty with Realtor Future Home Realty.

The free notification service provides an early warning system for subscribers, giving them a tool to become aware of fraudulent activity that may have otherwise gone undetected. Once notified, a property owner knows to contact law enforcement, seek legal advice, or even file a case in civil court.

“Property fraud alerts give individuals and businesses the tools they need to proactively monitor recorded documents and stop property fraud at its very source,”

Duval Clerk Phillips said.

“I greatly appreciate my fellow Clerks joining with me on the front steps of the Duval County Courthouse today as we present a united front against those who would seek to steal from our communities.”

Visit the website, accessible through or, to sign up for this free service in each of these participating counties.

Here are some tips from the FBI to make sure you are not a victim of this kind of fraud:

Get referrals for real estate and mortgage professionals.

Check the licenses of the industry professionals with state, county, or city regulatory agencies

If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Promises of big profits in a small amount of time are signals of concern

Be wary of unsolicited contacts and high-pressure sales online or over the phone


• Continue to provide this website, content, resources, community and help center for free to the many homeowners, residents, Texans and as we’ve expanded, people nationwide who need access without a paywall or subscription.

• Help us promote our campaign through marketing, pr, advertising and reaching out to government, law firms and anyone that will listen and can assist.

Thank you for your trust, belief and support in our conviction to help Floridian residents and citizens nationwide take back their freedom. Your Donations and your Voice are so important.

Continue Reading

Appellate Judges

The Eleventh Circuit Issues Another Glossed Opinion to Dismiss a Pro Se Lawyer’s Appeal

All motions under Rule 60(b) OTHER THAN those based on Rule 60(b)(4) must be made within a reasonable time.



Henry v. City of Mount Dora, No. 21-14120 (11th Cir. Sep. 16, 2022)


Before LUCK, LAGOA, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

Marie Henry, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s denial of her Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(4), (d)(3) motion seeking relief from the court’s order dismissing her federal claims raised pursuant to several federal statutes, and remanding to state court her state law claims raised pursuant to Florida state law.

After filing an ethics complaint against one of the defendants and a pro se motion to disqualify a judge in a predatory lending case, Henry was referred to a Florida Bar grievance committee on two counts of misconduct and, after disciplinary proceedings that she challenged as defective, she was suspended for 6 months.

She originally filed her complaint in Florida state court, but the Florida Bar removed her case to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida.

On appeal, she argues, first, that the district court erred by denying her Rule 60 motion as untimely.

Second, she contends that the court abridged her due process right to an impartial tribunal, notice, and an opportunity to be heard by dismissing her federal claims where the defendants did not unanimously consent to removal, the court judicially noticed facts without a hearing, and the judge was a member of an adverse party.

Third, she asserts that the court erred by failing to analyze fraud on the court.

Finally, she argues that the court’s denial of an extension to file objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation violated 28 U.S.C. § 2072.



We review de novo the denial of a motion to set aside a judg-ment for voidness under Rule 60(b)(4).

Stansell v. Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colom., 771 F.3d 713, 736 (11th Cir. 2014).

Motions pursuant to Rule 60(b)(4) are not subject to a reasonable timeliness requirement or a typical laches analysis.

Id. at 737-38.

But “Rule 60(b)(4) does not provide a license for litigants to sleep on their rights.”

United Student Aid Funds, Inc. v. Espinosa, 559 U.S. 260, 275 (2010).

When considering whether a movant slept on her rights, we have noted that subject matter jurisdiction cannot be waived and have addressed the merits of the movant’s jurisdictional argument.

See Stansell, 771 F.3d at 737

(holding that movant waived “his right to object to any defects in the service of process or to any denial of his right to be heard” because he “sat on his rights for nine months” but addressing alleged jurisdiction issues).

We may affirm for any reason supported by the record.

Bircoll v. Miami-Dade Cnty., 480 F.3d 1072, 1088 n.21 (11th Cir. 2007).

Here, the district court applied a reasonable time requirement to Henry’s Rule 60(b)(4) motion, but that requirement was inappropriate.

See Stansell, 771 F.3d at 737.

However, Henry sat on her rights by waiting more than 2 years to file her Rule 60(b)(4) motion.

See id. at 737-38.

Thus, we affirm the district court as to any issues raised by Henry that do not relate to subject matter jurisdiction because she slept on her rights for over two years.

Bircoll, 480 F.3d at 1088 n.21.

Like in Stansell, however, we next consider Henry’s arguments that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.

See Stansell, 771 F.3d at 737.



“United had actual notice of the filing of Espinosa’s plan, its contents, and the Bankruptcy Court’s subsequent confirmation of the plan. In addition, United filed a proof of claim regarding Espinosa’s student loan debt, thereby submitting itself to the Bankruptcy Court’s jurisdiction with respect to that claim…. United therefore forfeited its arguments regarding the validity of service or the adequacy of the Bankruptcy Court’s procedures by failing to raise a timely objection in that court.

United Student Aid Funds v. Espinosa, 559 U.S. 260, 275 (2010)


Before HULL, MARCUS and WILSON, Circuit Judges.:

“All motions under Rule 60(b) other than those based on Rule 60(b)(4) must be made within a reasonable time. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(c). ” Sec. & Exch. Comm’n v. J&J Mgmt. Consulting, No. 15-14628, at *4 (11th Cir. Oct. 3, 2016)


Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(4) provides relief from a final judgment or order if the judgment is void.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(4).

A judgment is not void under Rule 60(b)(4) merely because it was erroneous.

Espinosa, 559 U.S. at 270.

Generally, it is void solely if it is premised on a jurisdictional error depriving the court of even arguable jurisdiction or on a due process violation that deprived a party of notice or the opportunity to be heard.

See id. at 271.

Federal courts always have jurisdiction to determine their own jurisdiction.

In re Nica Holdings, Inc., 810 F.3d 781, 789 (11th Cir. 2015).

The Rooker-Feldman1 doctrine is a narrow jurisdictional doctrine concerning a court’s subject matter jurisdiction that bars parties who lose a case in state court from appealing their loss in a federal district court.

Behr v. Campbell, 8 F.4th 1206, 1208 (11th Cir. 2021);

Alvarez v. Att’y Gen for Fla., 679 F.3d 1257, 1264 (11th Cir. 2012).

Neither res judicata nor the requirement that all defendants consent to removal is jurisdictional.

See Narey v. Dean, 32 F.3d 1521, 1524-25 (11th Cir. 1994);

In re Bethesda Mem’l Hosp., Inc., 123 F.3d 1407, 1410 n.2 (11th Cir. 1997).

An appellant abandons any argument not briefed before us, made in passing, or raised briefly without supporting arguments or authority.

Access Now, Inc. v. Sw. Airlines Co., 385 F.3d 1324, 1330 (11th Cir. 2004);

Sapuppo v. Allstate Floridian Ins. Co., 739 F.3d 678, 681 (11th Cir. 2014).

We can consider sua sponte an abandoned issue if a forfeiture exception applies and extraordinary circumstances warrant review.

United States v. Campbell, 26 F.4th 860, 873 (11th Cir. 2022) (en banc), petition for cert. filed (U.S. May 17, 2022) (No. 21-1468).

Here, Henry was not entitled to relief pursuant to her Rule 60(b)(4) motion because she did not identify any jurisdictional defect depriving the district court of arguable jurisdiction.

See Espinosa, 559 U.S. at 271.

The requirement that all defendants consent to removal is not jurisdictional.

See In re Bethesda Mem’l Hosp., Inc., 123 F.3d at 1410 n.2.

Res judicata is not jurisdictional either.

Narey, 32 F.3d at 1524–25.

Moreover, to the extent Henry argues that the district court erred by concluding the Rooker-Feldman doctrine applied, that is an argument over which the court had jurisdiction because a court always has jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction.

See In re Nica Holdings, Inc., 810 F.3d at 789.

Moreover, Henry points to no error in the district court’s application of the doctrine, nor to any other possible jurisdictional problem that might have deprived the district court of arguable jurisdiction.

Thus, we affirm the district court’s denial of Henry’s Rule 60(b)(4) motion.

1 Rooker v. Fid. Tr. Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923); D.C. Court of Appeals v. Feld- man, 460 U.S. 462 (1983).


We review a district court’s denial of a Rule 60(d)(3) motion for relief from a judgment due to the opposing party’s fraud on the court for abuse of discretion.

See Cox Nuclear Pharm., Inc. v. CTI, Inc., 478 F.3d 1303, 1314 (11th Cir. 2007) (Rule 60(b)(3) motion).

Rule 60 does not limit a court’s power to set aside a judgment for fraud on the court.

Fed. R. Civ. P 60(d)(3).

A movant must prove fraud on the court with clear and convincing evidence.

See Booker v. Dugger, 825 F.2d 281, 283-84 (11th Cir. 1987)

(appealing denial of Rule 60(b) motion after denial of § 2254 petition).

Fraud on the court is limited to exceptional conduct like bribery or evidence falsification involving an attorney.

Rozier v. Ford Motor Co., 573 F.2d 1332, 1338 (5th Cir. 1978) (prior version of Rule 60).

We have held that, in independent actions challenging a judgment for fraud on the court, the alleged fraud must not have been raised in the original litigation, and it must not have been possible for the complaining party to raise the issue through reasonable diligence.

See Travelers Indem. Co. v. Gore, 761 F.2d 1549, 1552 (11th Cir. 1985).

Here, the district court addressed fraud on the court, and it correctly found that Henry failed to show sufficiently egregious conduct.

The conduct Henry points to on appeal, even if true, does not fall within the category of egregious conduct that can constitute fraud on the court, but instead amounts to, at most, arguably erroneous legal arguments, or conduct that occurred before she filed her complaint, neither of which come close to the necessary showing of fraud on the court.

See Rozier, 573 F.2d at 1338.

Furthermore, she does not challenge any conduct that was not raised before her Rule 60 motion or that she could not have raised through reasonable diligence.

See Travelers Indem. Co., 761 F.2d at 1552;

Bircoll, 480 F.3d at 1088 n.21.

Thus, we affirm the denial of her Rule 60(d)(3) motion.



We review a district court’s denial of a motion for extension of time for abuse of discretion.

See Lizarazo v. Miami-Dade Corr. & Rehab. Dep’t, 878 F.3d 1008, 1010-11 (11th Cir. 2017)

(extension of time to file motion for substitution).

A request for an extension should be granted if good cause is shown. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b).

Here, Henry arguably has shown good cause for an extension in her motion for an extension to file objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation concerning her Rule 60 motion because she asserted that she did not receive the report and recommendation until after the time for her to file objections had passed and she had been occupied caring for a family member.

We assume arguendo that she showed good cause for an extension.

However, the consequence for failing to object to the magistrate’s report and recommendation is waiver of the right to challenge those issues on appeal.

11th Cir. R. 3-1.

Because we have reviewed Henry’s arguments as if she had not waived them for failing to object, we affirm the denial of her motion for the reasons discussed above.

See R. 3-1; Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b).




• Continue to provide this website, content, resources, community and help center for free to the many homeowners, residents, Texans and as we’ve expanded, people nationwide who need access without a paywall or subscription.

• Help us promote our campaign through marketing, pr, advertising and reaching out to government, law firms and anyone that will listen and can assist.

Thank you for your trust, belief and support in our conviction to help Floridian residents and citizens nationwide take back their freedom. Your Donations and your Voice are so important.

Continue Reading

Most Read

Copyright © 2020-2023 is an online brand name which is wholly owned by Blogger Inc., a nonprofit 501(c)(3) registered in Delaware | Caricatures by DonkeyHotey