Joe Carollo still has to pay $63.5 million after federal court denies his appeal
A three-judge panel submitted its 19-page opinion that shot down Carollo's claims of jury tampering and dismissed his request for the $63 million verdict to be remitted.
Potentially, this marks the final ruling in a years-long legal battle between Carollo and Little Haiti businessmen William 'Bill' Fuller and Martin Pinilla. In 2023, a jury ruled the commissioner had carried out a vendetta by siccing Miami code enforcement and other city officials on their businesses.
'We are encouraged but not surprised by the U.S. Court of Appeals' clear rejection of Joe Carollo's baseless appeal,' Fuller and Pinilla said in a statement. 'This isn't just a legal victory—it's a win for every resident and business owner who believes in fairness, democracy, and the First Amendment.'
Carollo first filed motions to lower the $63.5 million judgment and request a new trial in late June 2024, but was denied by U.S. District Court Judge Rodney Smith. He met the same fate from the U.S. Court of Appeals on Thursday.
Carollo's legal team could not be reached for comment.
No jury tampering found
A large portion of Carollo's plea to the Court of Appeals revolved around his accusation the jury that saddled him with a $63.5 million payout had been tampered with.
He claimed the judge in the 2023 case was given a note from a juror that said she'd been followed into a parking garage by Zach Bush, a business partner of Fuller and Pinilla.
Immediately after, a jury inquiry was held by the court, with each juror questioned to determine if she had told her story to them and if it had affect their ability to remain impartial. The jury assured them they'd remain able to, and the trial ensued.
The three-judge panel concluded the jury investigation into the alleged tampering was properly handled and, for that reason, dismissed Carollo's claim, the Thursday opinion read.
As for the rest of Carollo's appeal, the court ruled that it lacked jurisdiction over it and dismissed it, as his notice of appeal was improperly filed.
'The court's sharp questioning and the overwhelming evidence presented at trial reaffirm what we have maintained from day one: Carollo abused his public office to wage a relentless campaign of political retaliation against us simply because we supported his opponent,' Fuller and Pinilla said. 'We look forward to putting this chapter behind us and continuing our work to uplift Little Havana.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
26 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trade group asks Supreme Court to limit Mississippi's social media law
An internet trade group asked the Supreme Court Wednesday to block Mississippi from enforcing its age-verification law against nine major social media platforms. NetChoice asked the justices for an emergency intervention after the 5 th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week without explanation lifted a block that had protected platforms like Facebook and Instagram from the new requirements. 'In a one-sentence order, the Fifth Circuit upended the First Amendment rights of Mississippi citizens seeking to access fully protected speech across social media websites,' NetChoice wrote. The existing block had prevented Mississippi from enforcing the law against nine NetChoice members covered by the law: Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, X, Snapchat, Reddit, Pinterest, Nextdoor and Dreamwitdth. Justice Samuel Alito, who by default handles emergency requests arising from the 5 th Circuit, ordered Mississippi to respond within a week. Alito could then act on the request alone or refer it to the full court for a vote. Mississippi's law requires social media companies to verify users' age and require minors to have express consent from a parent or guardian to use the platform. Covered websites must also work to mitigate minors' exposure to harmful material, and violations carry a $10,000 fine. It was originally set to go into effect on July 1, 2024, the same day the Supreme Court decided NetChoice's First Amendment challenges to Florida and Texas laws that regulate social media companies over accusations of political censorship. The Florida and Texas disputes involve what is known as a facial challenge, meaning NetChoice argues the laws are unconstitutional across the board. The Supreme Court's decision sent the cases back to lower courts with guidance for how to analyze the laws. In Mississippi, however, the judge's most recent injunction did not block the state's law facially. An appointee of the younger former President Bush, U.S. District Judge Halil Suleyman Ozerden only blocked the state's law as applied to NetChoice's members, which involves a different First Amendment analysis. NetChoice argued the 5 th Circuit's lack of explanation in lifting the judge's order is sufficient reason on its own for the Supreme Court to intervene. And regardless, the trade group says the block is needed to protect free speech as the litigation progresses. 'Yet, in stark contrast to the two extensively reasoned district court opinions in this case, the Fifth Circuit's order (entered less than an hour after Respondent submitted a reply brief) explains nothing. This is particularly troubling in the context of a decision with sudden and sweeping implications for accessing fully protected speech,' NetChoice wrote in the application.
USA Today
26 minutes ago
- USA Today
'Hands are tied': Trump DOJ loses bid to unseal Epstein grand jury testimony
A federal judge rejected the Justice Department's bid to unseal grand jury testimony tied to Florida-based investigations of sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. A federal judge in Florida rejected a bid from President Donald Trump's Justice Department on July 23 to unseal grand jury testimony tied to a two-decades-old investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The Justice Department asked the federal court in the Southern District of Florida to release transcripts from grand jury investigations that took place in West Palm Beach, Florida, in 2005 and 2007. However, Judge Robin L. Rosenberg ruled that she doesn't have the power to order the records' release. She said she is bound by a past ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, which governs Florida federal courts and only allows for releasing grand jury records in narrow circumstances. "(T)he Court's hands are tied," Rosenberg wrote in the order. The ruling does not apply to separate requests from the Justice Department for the Manhattan federal court to unseal grand jury testimony for federal criminal cases filed in that court against Epstein and his associate, convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell. This is a developing story that will be updated.
UPI
an hour ago
- UPI
Rubio says Harvard might lose visa program eligibility
The State Department on Wednesday announced it is investigating Harvard University's participation in a visa program to determine if it runs counter to Trump administration policies or compromises national security. File Photo (2019) by Matthew Healey/UPI | License Photo July 23 (UPI) -- The State Department is investigating whether Harvard University undermines U.S. policy via educational and cultural exchanges that enable international students, professors and others to obtain visas. The investigation's purpose is to determine whether or not Harvard officials are undermining national security and foreign policy through its participation in the Exchange Visitor Program, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced on Wednesday. "All sponsors participating in this program are required to fully comply with exchange visitor regulations, transparency in reporting and a demonstrated commitment to fostering the principles of cultural exchange and mutual understanding upon which the program was founded," Rubio said in a prepared statement. Harvard "must comply with all regulations ... in a manner that does not undermine the foreign policy objectives or compromise the national security interests of the United States," Rubio continued. "The American people have the right to expect their universities to uphold national security, comply with the law and provide safe environments for all students." He said the investigation will ensure the university's participation in State Department programs does not "run contrary to our nation's interests." The Trump administration in May revoked Harvard's eligibility to participate in the Exchange Visitor Program. U.S. District Court of Massachusetts Judge Allison Burroughs overturned the revocation of Harvard's program eligibility. Rubio notified Harvard University President Dr. Alan Garber of the investigation on Wednesday but did not accuse university officials of any wrongdoing in the matter. He gave Harvard a week to provide relevant university records and said the department will interview university staff and possibly students who are participating in the exchange program. The Department of Homeland Security in July likewise subpoenaed Harvard to obtain information on the university's program participation. The State Department's investigation will not affect Harvard's sponsorship and enrollment of students, professors and researchers, according to a statement shared with United Press International. "This investigation is yet another retaliatory step taken by the administration in violation of Harvard's First Amendment rights," a Harvard spokesperson said. "Harvard continues to enroll and sponsor international scholars, researchers and students and will protect its international community and support them as they apply for U.S. visas and travel to campus this fall."
