Keitel v. D'Agostino, Sr.

Background

The court had previously imposed sanctions on Plaintiff Frederick J. Keitel, III and Spencer Robbins, a lawyer purporting to represent other plaintiffs. It directed the defendants to submit records of their attorneys’ fees and costs and gave Keitel and Robbins an opportunity to respond. Instead, Keitel filed a motion to disqualify Judge Furman and a motion for permission to file a bankruptcy notice and pause the proceedings.

Motions to Disqualify and Pause the Case

The court denied both motions. It found Keitel’s disqualification motion frivolous, noting that he accused the judge of improper communications with other judges without evidence. The court stated that neither Judge Furman nor his staff had discussed the case or Keitel with anyone listed in Keitel’s motion.

The court also found no support for pausing the case. Keitel claimed that he could not afford the $1,000 fine imposed in the earlier sanctions order, but he provided no financial information or evidence. The court therefore could not conclude that he lacked the resources to pay the fine. The court also found no evidence that a bankruptcy stay was in effect: Keitel’s bankruptcy case had been closed, had not been reopened despite his requests, and the bankruptcy court had denied his most recent request to reopen it. The court warned that continued frivolous and inflammatory filings could lead to additional sanctions.

Attorneys’ Fees and Costs

The court largely approved the defendants’ requests for attorneys’ fees and costs, but excluded fees for work on Keitel’s other Florida cases and his pending appeal in the Second Circuit. The court concluded that those amounts were not directly related to conduct in this case. It reduced the request by 9.2 hours, or $5,588, for Shutts & Bowen LLP, and by 9.2 hours, or $3,670.50, for Elman Freiberg PLLC.

The court awarded FJK-Tee Jay, Ltd. $92,037.91 in attorneys’ fees and costs and awarded the Fox Defendants $103,308.88. Keitel and Robbins were ordered to pay those amounts jointly and individually by July 10, 2023.

Fine and Disposition

Keitel had not paid the separate $1,000 fine by the original deadline. Because he had not shown that he was financially unable to pay it, the court did not relieve him of that obligation. It extended the payment deadline, retroactively, to June 26, 2023. The court stated that failing to pay the fine or the awarded fees and costs on time could result in an increased sanction or additional sanctions. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the two motions.