Judge orders J.C. Planas to pay first-ever fine for filing ‘frivolous’ Miami-Dade ethics complaint

Juan-Carlos "J.C." Planas' campaign leaned heavily on his deep knowledge of ethics and elections law. Image via J.C. Planas.

A Miami-Dade County court has ordered lawyer and former Rep. Juan-Carlos “J.C.” Planas to pay the legal expenses former Miami Beach Commissioner Michael Góngora incurred while defending a “frivolous” ethics complaint in 2023.

Góngora’s lawyer, Adam Cervera, called the ruling a just outcome that he hopes will “send a chilling effect on those who want to use the (Miami-Dade) Ethics Commission for improper means.”

Planas, who specializes in ethics and elections law and last year ran unsuccessfully for Miami-Dade Supervisor of Elections, contends that the ruling is out of order, literally and figuratively.

On Wednesday afternoon, county civil Judge Michael Barket concurred with a July 2024 decision by the Miami-Dade Commission on Ethics and Public Trust (COE) that Planas had wrongly petitioned it for action against Góngora even though he “knew or should have known, at the time of filing, that his complaint was not supported” by law.

The COE ordered Planas to pay Góngora $5,675 to cover the latter’s legal fees. That’s the same sum Barket ordered Planas to pay this week, plus potentially extra repayment he may be due under the state’s prevailing party statutes.

But there’s another case ongoing, an appeal of the COE’s ruling that Planas initiated in August, nearly a month and a half before Góngora sued him. That hasn’t yet reached a resolution, meaning Planas could pay the damages Barket ordered for Góngora and, if Planas wins his appeal, have the money returned to him.

Planas told Florida Politics he believes the second, since-concluded case is less due to Góngora’s desire for a quick payment and more because of a grudge Cervera holds against him for filing a complaint in 2022 against wife, who at the time was running for a Miami-Dade judgeship.

He said he’s being punished for doing his job, filing a complaint on behalf of a client that he thought was legitimate.

“This is a complete and utter farce, petty and vindictive,” Planas said by phone. “It’s an abuse of judicial discretion to award fees when the appellate court hasn’t finalized it yet.”

Asked whether he planned to appeal Barket’s ruling, he said, “Of course, and I’m going to ask for an emergency stay from the 3rd (District Court of Appeal) until the appellate panel rules.”

The fees at issue stem from a September 2023 complaint Planas filed on behalf of former Rep. Michael Grieco, who at the time was running for Miami Beach Mayor.

No-party candidate Steven Meiner, Góngora’s former colleague on the City Commission, ultimately won the race. Grieco later received a one-year suspension from the Florida Bar for campaign finance violations in 2017.

Planas’ September 2023 complaint asserted that Góngora, a fellow Democrat, violated ethics strictures by failing to disclose as campaign gifts three tickets he received for Carbone Beach, the city’s annual VIP dinner party, in May 2023.

Góngora never disclosed the source of the tickets. He maintained, as did Becker lawyers representing him, that he was under no legal obligation to disclose the tickets because he didn’t qualify for the Miami Beach Mayor’s race until Sept. 7. When he accepted the tickets and attended the event, he was not serving in any elected office.

Planas sent a similar complaint to the Florida Commission on Ethics, which rejected it Oct. 25. In its order, the State Commission concurred with Góngora’s position that he was only required to file a gift disclosure report upon his qualifying to run for office.

Both complaints hinged on Form 9 disclosure requirements, which are mandated at the state level. Despite the State Commission’s dismissal of Planas’ complaint for “lack of legal sufficiency,” Planas continued to pursue his substantively identical complaint in Miami-Dade for almost a month after, until the COE tossed it too.

COE Chair Judith Bernier, then the panel’s Vice Chair, wrote in a July 15 order that Planas had an “admitted familiarity” with the Miami-Dade ethics ordinances and, as such, his complaint was “frivolous.” She wrote that he “knew or should have known, at the time of filing, that his complaint was not supported by the application of ordinances under the Ethics Commission’s jurisdiction to the material facts present.”

The COE’s order on July 10, 2024, represented the first time since its 1996 founding that it awarded fees in a decision.

Planas told Florida Politics shortly after the COE decision that he would quickly appeal it, as doing otherwise could dictate how state statutes are interpreted when considering attorneys fee penalties and sanctions for unsupported claims or defenses.

“The Commission made a grave mistake of setting a legal precedent that will make it almost impossible for someone to file a complaint like this in the future,” he said. “They’ve lowered the standard of frivolity so low that people are going to be afraid to file lawsuits. You get a judge on the wrong day, and someone can be ordered to pay fees for filing a lawsuit in good faith.”