So-called Expert Attorney improperly Serves a Legal Document

Photo of Attorney Daniel J. Kortenhaus who specializes in Evictions because he is an incompetent Civil Litigator who can only win against Pro Se Defendant-Tenants and Pro Se Plaintiffs but never against real and competent Attorneys…

Photo of Domestic Violence Suspect and Perpetrator of Attorney Misconduct against Terry Richards is Attorney Daniel J. Kortenhaus with shades and smiling, thinking he’s now home free from being further exposed for further Criminal and/or Civil Misconduct against others since Terry Richards who filed several Complaints against him with the Florida Bar moved to Los Angeles in March of 2012… Not so Daniel…

Original Story was Written by Columnist Terry Richards on Veterans Corner by Terry Richards www.veteranscorner.wordpress.com . This is the Revised Story Written by The Staff of America’s Slumlords… Be sure to read this related story later: Landlord’s Attorney Harasses, Threatens, Intimidates, Extorts Ex-Tenant-Disabled Veteran who Sues Landlord

ST. PETERSBURG, FL – After Veterans Rights Advocate Terry Richards published a story about how his Landlord/Property Manager Janet L. Kaspar, among other things, Berated an 80-year-old 2-War Veteran, and then his Landlord started Eviction Procedures and retained Daniel J. Kortenhaus a self-proclaimed Expert Attorney, Kortenhaus in a letter written after a Civil Court Hearing for Attorneys Fees and Costs to Richards who was the Non-Attorney Pro Se Defendant in that Hearing ridiculed Richards for being incompetent in Defending his case and then boasted in the letter about how he (Kortenhaus a self-procalaimed Expert Licensed Attorney) prevailed in that Civil matter by winning a $7,100 Judgment for Attorneys Fees and Costs for his Client Cara FL Properties. Then only days later after the above hearing, Kortenhaus was found to be incompetent by the Court for not knowing how to properly Serve a Writ of Garnishment on Richards’ Bank Account, the details of which are set forth below.

After applying for, and the Court Granting a Writ of Garnishment to attach Richards’ Chase Bank Account that Kortenhaus and his Client thought was at that Bank because, among other things, that’s where Richards’ rent checks were drawn, Kortenhaus hand-delivered the Writ of Garnishment to the local Bank Branch Office of that specific Chase Bank instead of hand-delivering, mailing, or otherwise Process Serving a copy of that Writ to the listed Registered Agent or Corporate Legal Department of Chase Bank which any Pro Se Litigant or first-year Law School Student would have known that this was the only proper way to Serve a Writ of Garnishment.

Then to make things even worse for Kortenhaus, when Richards advised Kortenhaus in writing that after reading online Court Dockets that Kortenhaus had applied for a Writ of Garnishment that he closed his Bank Account even though he only had $15 in the account in order to avoid Bank costs and fees which would have occurred if he had left his account open. After reading this, Kortenhaus went into frenzie and made the Bank a Party to the Civil Action as a “Garnishee”.

It appears that Kortenhaus filed the above “Garnishee” Action against Chase Bank because Kortenhaus did not believe that Richards only had $15 in the Bank Account when he closed it and thought there was substantially more in the account, and that somehow, Chase Bank should be held responsible for paying whatever money was in that account even after Richards closed the account before Kortenhaus improperly Served the Writ of Garnishment Richard’s Bank. However, Chase Bank and their Attorneys, a large Miami, Florida Law Firm who Chase Bank retained to handle the matter did not see it that way.

So when Kortenhaus went up against real Expert and Licensed Attorneys rather than just a Non-Attorney Pro Se Litigant like Richards, the Judge Dismissed the Action against Chase Bank and Ordered that Kortenhaus’ Client Cara FL Properties pay Attorney’s Fees and Costs to Chase Banks’ Attorneys, thereby, embarrassing Kortenhaus, his Client, and the Court. It is not known at this time if Kortenhaus’ Client Demanded that because of Kortenhaus’ Legal Malpractice and Incompetence that Kortenhaus pay Chase Bank’s Attorneys out of his own pocket???

There is a sad and then funny and amusing side of this story. The sad side of the story is that after Koretenhaus wrote a threatening and extortive letter to Richards demanding that he Dismiss a Lawsuit against his Client Cara FL Properties for among other things, Wrongful Eviction, and then Richards filing a Complaint with the Florida Bar asking for Disciplinary Action against Kortenhaus, the Florida Bar did not take any Disciplinary Action against Kortenhaus but rather only issued him a Letter of Advice to not write anymore threatening and extortive letters like this again to anyone. By not issuing Disciplinary Action against Kortenhaus, The Florida Bar has basically given their “seal of approval” for Attorneys to threaten and extort Pro Se Litigants.

There is funny and amusing side of this story is that when Richards realized that one Richard “Richie” Rosenhaus a Tenant of Cara FL Properties whom Richards was once friendly with started asking Richards a lot of questions as to what Richards strategy was in the Legal Action against Richards, Richards realized that Rosenhaus was working for the Plaintiff Cara FL Properties. So after that, Richards, among other things, started giving Rosenhaus “Misinformation” about his strategies.

One piece of “Misinformation” Richards told Rosenhaus was that he had settled an accident case for $48,000 and that he was going to keep his Chase Bank Account even if the Landlord got a Judgment against him and Garnished the Account because he felt it was too inconvenient for him to close the Account due of his Social Security Direct Deposit going into this account, so he would rather just pay the Judgment now and that he would get that money back later in a separate Lawsuit he was going to file against the Landlord Cara FL Properties. It was this piece of “Misinformation” that caused Kortenhaus to go into a frenzie and make Chase Bank a Party to the Action against Richards because Kortenhaus and the Landlord thought that Richards had all this money in the Bank, when in fact, he did not, because in fact, he had not settled the accident case.

In closing, reasonable minds might ask why Kortenhaus had not listed the Law School he attended, and why there are no photos of Kortenhaus available online other than possibly on “MY LIFE” and its ilk.

Set forth below are one of Kortenhaus’ advertisements on the Internet espousing “EXPERT ADVICE”; RELATED STORIES, and THE COURT DOCKET revealing the above stated GARNISHEE matter with CHASE BANK.

Daniel J. Kortenhaus – Avvo.com – Expert Advice When You Need … 18 years since Daniel J. Kortenhaus was first licensed to practice law. State License status … No Law School provided: law: Expert Advice When You Need It Most. Avvo Legal.

www.avvo.com/attorneys/33703-fl-daniel–kortenhaus… – Cached

See related stories herein at Veterans Corner by Terry Richards

——————————————————————————

03/29/2012			WITHOUT PREJUDICE Comment: WITHOUT PREJUDICE; VER: F; P
03/29/2012			NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL Comment: NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF GARNISHMENT; VER: F; P
03/27/2012			AS TO: Comment: FOR: GARN ATTY FEES/DEMAND 032312 CARA FL PROP V RICHARDS; VER: N; A
03/27/2012			AS TO: Comment: TO: SHUTTS & BOWEN LLP OBO CHASE BANK; VER: N; A
03/27/2012			TEXT Comment: COURT REGISTRY CHECK NUMBER: 973060 $100.00; VER: N; A
03/26/2012			ORIGINAL RECORD ON APPEAL PREPARED Comment: ORIGINAL RECORD ON APPEAL PREPARED; VER: N; K
03/23/2012			ANSWER OF GARNISHEE Comment: ANSWER OF GARNISHEE CHASE BANK; VER: F; G
03/21/2012			NOTICE OF NON-PAYMENT Comment: NOTICE OF NON-PAYMENT MAILED; VER: F; K
03/14/2012			ORDER Comment: ORDER UPON GARNISHMENT; VER: F; P
03/13/2012			PLTF/PET’S MOTION Comment: MOTION TO HOLD DEFT IN CONTEMPT OF COURT; VER: F; P
03/09/2012			FACT INFORMATION SHEET Comment: FACT INFORMATION SHEET; VER: F; P
03/06/2012			DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Comment: DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL; VER: N; P
03/05/2012			CERTIFICATE Comment: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF WRIT OF GARNISHMENT ETC; VER: F; P
03/02/2012			WRIT OF GARNISHMENT Comment: WRIT OF GARNISHMENT RETD SERVED; VER: F; K
03/01/2012			WRIT OF GARNISHMENT Comment: WRIT OF GARNISHMENT /HANDED TO PS/CHASE BANK; VER: F; K
03/01/2012			Circuit Garnishment Fees Paid $ Comment: GARNISHMENT FEE PAID $85.00; VER: N; P
03/01/2012			Registry Fees Paid $ Comment: REGISTRY FEES PAID $3.00; VER: N; P
03/01/2012			Court Registry Deposit $ Comment: COURT REGISTRY DEPOSIT $100.00; VER: N; P
03/01/2012			PLAINTIFF’S MOTION/REQUEST FOR WRIT OF GARNISHMENT Comment: MOTION WRIT OF GARNISHMENT / CHASE BANK; VER: F; P