A woman was recently arrested in Florida after attacking a man with a can of Pringles and possibly causing him “permanent disfigurement,” law enforcement in the Sunshine State say.

Shanika Serdahl, 28, stands accused of one count of aggravated battery, according to the Orange County Sheriff’s Office.

The incident occurred on Thursday, at a 7-Eleven on International Drive in Orlando, according to an arrest affidavit.

A deputy arrived in response to a call about a “physical fight” at the convenience store, the court document says.

A Florida nurse likely will be blind for the rest of her life after a patient allegedly attacked her unprovoked.

Deputies from the Palm Beach Sheriff’s Office wrote an arrest affidavit that the patient, later identified as 33-year-old Stephen Eric Scantlebury, had been admitted to HCA Florida Palms West Hospital under the Baker Act, which allows people to be involuntarily detained and examined for mental health issues, and was receiving treatment. Shortly before 1:30 p.m. Tuesday the nurse walked into Scantlebury’s third-floor room. Witnesses said the suspect inexplicably “jumped on top of his bed, and then jumped onto and attacked the victim,” according to the affidavit.

More from Law&Crime: Man killed his dad, hid body under blue tarp in yard telling worried son it ‘was trash’ before fleeing to Walmart

Scantlebury allegedly stood over the victim and repeatedly punched her in the face. A witness yelled for him to stop and he ran out of the room. He fled down the hallway and into the stairwell where he went down to the first floor and escaped from the hospital. The suspect, shirtless and still wearing patches from an EKG monitor, reportedly sprinted across the parking lot and into traffic on Southern Boulevard. Video obtained by local TV stations showed deputies pointing what appeared to be either Tasers or stun guns at Scantlebury and ordering him onto the ground in the middle of the road. He surrendered and deputies took him into custody.

The nurse was transported via helicopter to another hospital where she was last listed in critical condition. Doctors said “essentially every bone in the victim’s face is broken and the victim is likely to lose the use of both eyes.”

According to cops, Scantlebury had been “acting paranoid” for the last few days and “blaming people in his life for events they had nothing to do with.” That led to authorities to take him into custody under the Baker Act.

In a statement, HCA Florida Healthcare said the attack “happened within a matter of seconds.”

“Our primary concern is with our beloved colleague and we are praying for her recovery. We are also providing support to our hospital staff who are understandably shaken by this incident,” the hospital said.

Willa Fuller, executive director of the Florida Nurses Association, also released a statement expressing concern about the safety of nurses as attacks happen across the country.

“With concern about a longstanding nursing shortage, there needs to be substantive action by ALL stakeholders to prevent this kind of egregious action. We would like to see direct care nurses included in any initiatives related to violence against healthcare workers,” she said.

Scantlebury stands accused of attempted murder and is receiving treatment at a hospital. His next court date is scheduled for Tuesday.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. No. 42 law firm by head count could face…

Technology

No. 42 law firm by head count could face sanctions over fake case citations generated by AI

By Debra Cassens Weiss

February 10, 2025, 10:30 am CST

Updated: Lawyers from plaintiffs law firm Morgan & Morgan are facing possible sanctions for a motion that cited eight nonexistent cases, at least some of which were apparently generated by artificial intelligence.

In a Feb. 6 order, U.S. District Judge Kelly H. Rankin of the District of Wyoming told lawyers from Morgan & Morgan and the Goody Law Group to provide copies of the cited cases, and if they can’t, to show cause why they shouldn’t be sanctioned.

Law360 and Original Jurisdiction have coverage.

The cases cited by the court had been “hallucinated” by an internal AI platform and were not legitimate, the firms said in a Feb. 10 response to the show-cause order.

“This matter comes with great embarrassment and has prompted discussion and action regarding the training, implementation and future use of artificial intelligence within our firm,” the response said. “This serves as a cautionary tale for our firm and all firms, as we enter this new age of artificial intelligence.”

The law firms’ brief had cited nine cases, but Rankin could locate only one of them. Some of the citations did lead to cases under different names.

The lawyers’ motion also included a description of the governing legal standard that was “peculiar,” Rankin said. The motion correctly cited a federal rule of evidence but then went on to say “Wyoming caselaw reinforces these principles.” To support the assertion about Wyoming caselaw, the motion cited fake federal district court cases.

“Notwithstanding this slight inconsistency, experienced litigators like plaintiffs’ counsel should know that this court is a federal court, and therefore federal procedural law governs evidentiary issues,” Rankin wrote.

Morgan & Morgan is ranked No. 42 in the United States based on firm head count, according to Original Jurisdiction, which cited figures from the American Lawyer. The Goody Law Group appears to be a small firm based in California.

“Moral of the story: Lawyers at large firms can misuse ChatGPT as well as anyone,” wrote Above the Law founder David Lat at Original Jurisdiction.

The case involves a hoverboard sold by Walmart that allegedly exploded and caught fire, according to Law360.

The lawyers who signed the now-withdrawn motion with the alleged fake cites were Rudwin Ayala and T. Michael Morgan of Morgan & Morgan and Taly Goody of the Goody Law Group.

They did not immediately respond to ABA Journal emails seeking comment. Morgan and Goody did not respond to Journal voicemails. A person who answered a call at Morgan & Morgan could not locate Ayala in the directory.

The communications director for Morgan & Morgan emailed the Journal a copy of the show-cause response after it was filed.

Updated Feb. 12 at 8:50 a.m. to report on the response to the show-cause order.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

President Donald Trump may have criminally absolved Jan. 6 participants through pardons, commutations and dismissals this week, but that doesn’t erase the civil lawsuits that are currently pending against several rioters.

Defendants Taylor Taranto and Dr. David Walls-Kaufman, for instance, of Washington state, are both still facing wrongful death lawsuits for attacking a Capitol Police officer who shot and killed himself after suffering from “severe depression” and a “brain injury” caused by a concussion he allegedly sustained at their hands.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Lawyer must face ethics charge alleging he…

Ethics

Lawyer must face ethics charge alleging he tried to hire Israeli hackers to access judge’s emails

By Debra Cassens Weiss

September 19, 2024, 11:52 am CDT

A California bar court judge has rejected a lawyer’s bid to dismiss an ethics charge alleging that he plotted to hire Israeli hackers to hack in to the email and phone accounts of a judge and a lawyer.

In a Sept. 17 order, State Bar of California Judge Yvette D. Roland denied the motion to dismiss filed by lawyer Michael Jacob Libman of Tarzana, California, Law360 reports.

Libman had argued that the bar charge should be dismissed because it is based on allegations that he talked about his plan, rather than engaging in it. He also claimed that his conversations about the matter were speech protected by the First Amendment. And he claimed that he was entitled to a jury trial under a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision involving the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Ethics regulators initially accused Libman in March of plotting to file a billing-mistake lawsuit on behalf of Los Angeles utility customers that would settle favorably to the city. The suit and the $67 million settlement agreement had been prepared by a lawyer hired by the city, the ethics complaint alleged.

The settlement included an attorney fee award of $1.65 million for Libman. He was ordered in March 2021 to forfeit the fee after he failed to turn over detailed time records for the case and refused to answer deposition questions.

Regulators added an ethics charge for the alleged Israeli hacker plot in June. Libman was accused of seeking to hack the accounts of California Judge Elihu Berle, who had ordered Libman to disgorge attorney fees, and lawyer Brian S. Kabateck, who was appointed to be the new class counsel in the utility case.

Libman allegedly talked about the hacking plot with another lawyer, Paul Paradis of New York, who turned out to be a confidential FBI informant directed to record his phone calls and meetings with Libman.

Roland said Libman’s alleged plot included more than just talk. Libman engaged Paradis as an accomplice, revealed that he was communicating with Israeli hackers, and received an encrypted burner phone to talk with the hackers, Roland said. Libman and Paradis also allegedly discussed costs in a call with one of the hackers.

The ethics allegations are based on overt acts that furthered the hacking plan, and the alleged illicit conduct is not protected by the First Amendment, Roland said.

Libman had also argued that he was entitled to a jury trial before a neutral adjudicator. In support of that argument, Libman cited the Supreme Court’s decision in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy. The June decision held that defendants facing civil penalties for securities fraud before the Securities and Exchange Commission are entitled to a jury trial under the Seventh Amendment.

Roland said Jarkesy doesn’t affect the ethics case because the Seventh Amendment applies only to civil trials in federal court and not to state court proceedings.

“Moreover, the state bar court is ‘not an ordinary administrative agency,’” Roland said, citing a 2000 California decision. “Rather, the state bar court functions as an arm of the California Supreme Court, which has inherent jurisdiction over attorney disciplinary proceedings.”

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Lawyers representing transgender plaintiffs…

Ethics

Lawyers representing transgender plaintiffs face possible sanctions for alleged ‘judge shopping’

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 25, 2024, 12:45 pm CDT

A federal judge in Alabama has directed 11 lawyers to show cause why they shouldn’t be sanctioned for alleged “judge shopping” in lawsuits challenging a ban on some gender-affirming medical procedures for transgender minors in the state.

On March 19, U.S. District Judge Liles C. Burke of the Northern District of Alabama, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, unsealed an October 2023 report, which found that 11 out of 39 lawyers for the plaintiffs tried to circumvent random case assignment procedures. The report was conducted by a panel of three Alabama federal judges after Burke expressed concern about judge shopping.

Also on March 19, Burke unsealed his order to show cause, which was initially filed Feb. 21.

Law360, Reuters, Bloomberg Law and the Volokh Conspiracy have coverage.

“It is one thing for attorneys to fret about potential judicial assignments before the ball is snapped (i.e., before a case is assigned),” the three federal judges wrote in the unsealed report. “It is another to try to change the play after the case has been assigned.”

The plaintiffs’ lawyers dropped two suits challenging the transgender medical law after the cases ended up before Burke. A new challenge with different plaintiffs was then filed in the Middle District of Alabama, where U.S. District Judge Myron H. Thompson, an appointee of former President Jimmy Carter, is located.

The new case was not assigned to Thompson, however. It was instead assigned to Burke, who “perhaps ironically,” the report said, blocked a section of the law banning puberty blockers, according to NPR. A federal appeals court later lifted Burke’s injunction.

Lawyers had failed to get one of the two initial cases before Thompson by marking the civil cover sheet as related to a previous case in which Thompson ruled for transgender plaintiffs in a challenge to Alabama’s policy regarding sex changes on driver’s licenses, according to the Associated Press.

The 11 lawyers are ordered to appear before Burke on May 22 and 23 for a sanctions hearing.

Burke’s order directs the lawyers to show cause why they shouldn’t be sanctioned for judge shopping and for misrepresenting or failing to disclose key facts during the inquiry. Certain lawyers were also ordered to show cause whether they should be sanctioned for deliberately misleading the three-judge panel and for failing to get their clients’ consent before dismissing one of the cases.

According to news coverage, the 11 lawyers were from these groups and law firms: the Southern Poverty Law Center, GLBTQ Advocates & Defenders, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Alabama, the National Center for Lesbian Rights, Lambda Legal, Lightfoot Franklin & White, Cooley, and King & Spalding. (The King & Spalding lawyer is now with a different firm, while the Lambda Legal lawyer is now with the U.S. Department of Justice.)

Representatives of the groups and firms defended the work of their attorneys, according ti Law360. A Cooley representative told the publication that its attorneys “carried out their responsibilities appropriately and acted with integrity in this matter.”

A Lightfoot Franklin representative told Law360 that the firm is “confident that our attorneys acted in good faith and with no intent to violate any law, rule or established caselaw.”

Burke is sitting by designation in the case, Boe v. Marshall, filed in the Middle District of Alabama.

See also:

“‘Judge shopping’ in federal courts should end, House urges”

A 42-year-old caregiver in Tennessee has been arrested for allegedly throwing boiling water on an elderly patient in her care, leaving the victim with second and third-degree burns on his face, neck, and back.

Tina M. Vaughn was taken into custody on Monday and charged with one felony count of aggravated abuse of a vulnerable adult and one misdemeanor count of simple assault, court records reviewed by Law&Crime show.

According to a probable cause affidavit, an officer with the Memphis Police Department at about 4:30 p.m. on Jan. 24, 2024, responded to a call at the Regional One Burn Center in the 800 block of Jefferson Avenue.

The patient suffered second and third-degree burns “to the right side of his face, shoulder, and right side of his back,” the affidavit states. The document notes that the victim — who is deaf — lives in a group home and has “intellectual and developmental disabilities,” which include schizophrenia and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, commonly referred to as ADHD.

A sign language interpreter was required for police to take the victim’s statement.

The victim told the officer that at about 10:30 p.m. on Jan. 21, he was at his group home in the 600 block of Gookin Place along with his caregiver, whom he identified as Tina Vaughn. According to the victim, Vaughn was “responsible” for his well-being.