Of the 47 lawyers recognized, 12 of the firm’s attorneys were recognized for the very first time and 14 attorneys were recognized as Ones to Watch. 

Best Lawyers has employed the same transparent methodology for more than 35 years, based entirely on peer review. 

The following includes all Firm attorneys named and areas in which they are recognized:

Miami

• Mitchell A. Bierman (Administrative / Regulatory Law, Government Contracts, Government Relations Practice)
• Lillian Arango (Real Estate Law)
• Maria Victoria Currais (Real Estate Law)
• Jeffrey Decarlo (Commercial Litigation, Public Finance Law)
• Alan K. Fertel (Sports Law)
• Chad S. Friedman (Land Use and Zoning Law, Real Estate Law)
• Jessika Arce Graham (Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law)
• Edward G. Guedes (Appellate Practice)
• Stephen J. Helfman (Land Use and Zoning Law)
• Juan P. Loumiet (Litigation – Real Estate, Real Estate Law)
• Justin Luger (Commercial Litigation)
• Anthony L. Recio (Land Use and Zoning Law)
• Paul Ryder (Employment Law – Management)
• Clifford A. Schulman (Environmental Law, Land Use and Zoning Law)
• Joseph H. Serota (Commercial Litigation)
• Eduardo M. Soto (Real Estate Law)
• Richard Jay Weiss (Government Relations Practice)
• Laura K. Wendell (Appellate Practice)
• David M. Wolpin (Employment Law – Management, Government Relations Practice)
• Daniela Cimo (Ones to Watch: Land Use and Zoning Law)
• Kelsie Elmer (Ones to Watch: Real Estate Law)
• Roger C. Pou (Ones to Watch: Municipal Law)
• Samantha W. Soto (Ones to Watch: Labor and Employment Law – Management, Litigation – Labor and Employment)
• Alejandro Uribe (Ones to Watch: Land Use and Zoning Law)

Fort Lauderdale

• Daniel L. Abbott (Litigation – Land Use and Zoning)
• Mitchell J. Burnstein (Commercial Litigation, Eminent Domain and Condemnation Law)
• Jamie A. Cole (Commercial Litigation)
• Alicia Gonzalez (Real Estate Law)
• Paul Gougelman (Land Use and Zoning Law)
• Michael J. Kurzman (Construction Law, Litigation – Construction)
• Matthew H. Mandel (Commercial Litigation)
• Eric L. Stettin (Commercial Litigation)
• Susan L. Trevarthen (Land Use and Zoning Law)
• Peter D. Waldman (Eminent Domain and Condemnation Law)
• Isabella Falcon (Ones to Watch: Commercial Litigation)
• Anne Reilly Flanigan (Ones to Watch: Appellate Practice, Civil Rights Law, Commercial Litigation)
• Narinah Jean-Baptiste (Ones to Watch: Municipal Law)
• Bryan C. Siddique (Ones to Watch: Commercial Litigation)
• Alison F. Smith (Ones to Watch: Labor and Employment Law – Management)
• Blayne Yudis (Ones to Watch: Commercial Litigation)

Boca Raton

• Howard D. Dubosar (Commercial Litigation, Litigation – Bankruptcy)
• Andrew S. Maurodis (Land Use and Zoning Law)
• Brett J. Schneider (Employment Law – Management, Labor Law – Union, Litigation – Labor and Employment)
• David N. Tolces (Real Estate Law)
• Ethan Goldstein (Ones to Watch: Commercial Litigation)
• Ryan Hudak (Ones to Watch: Labor and Employment Law – Management)
• Jeremy S. Rosner (Ones to Watch: Commercial Litigation)

The post WSHC+B Attorneys Selected for Inclusion in the Best Lawyers in America 2025 appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

Super Lawyers recognizes distinguished attorneys who have undergone a rigorous screening process and are ultimately selected for inclusion in their annual list of exceptional legal professionals. Published by Thomson Reuters, Super Lawyers is a rating service of attorneys from more than 70 practice areas and determines its rankings through independent research, peer nominations, and peer evaluations. Only the top 5 percent of outstanding lawyers in Florida are rated by Super Lawyers, while no more than 2.5 percent of lawyers under 40 years old or who have practiced for fewer than 10 years are selected as Rising Stars.

The Firm’s recognized attorneys are listed below.

Miami

Recognized as Super Lawyers

• Mitchell Bierman
• Alan K. Fertel
• Edward G. Guedes
• Joseph H. Serota

Recognized as Rising Star

• Justin D. Luger

Fort Lauderdale

Recognized as Super Lawyers

• Mitchell J. Burnstein
• Jamie A. Cole
• Susan Trevarthen
• Peter D. Waldman

Recognized as Rising Stars

• Anne Reilly Flanigan
• Alicia Gonzalez
• Chanae Wood

Boca Raton

Recognized as Super Lawyers

• Howard D. DuBosar
• Alen H. Hsu
• Brett J. Schneider

The post WSHC+B ATTORNEYS RECOGNIZED AS 2024 SUPER LAWYERS AND RISING STARS appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

The Third District Court of Appeal’s decision upheld the ruling and affirmed the denial of a temporary injunction. The Third DCA also found neither an abuse of discretion in the trial court’s decision to deny the motion for temporary injunction, nor any error in its attendant legal conclusions. Reflecting on the decision, Guedes stated, “The facts are what they are, and the courts have concluded that the City of Miami Beach had a legitimate, rational basis for taking corrective action to protect their residents in that neighborhood.”

This case has been a focal point of discussion, shedding light on the balance between nightlife economy and the interests of residents. The Court’s decision underscores the importance of local regulations and the City’s commitment to its residents.

For an in-depth look at the case and its implications, click here to read the full article.

The post Edward Guedes Defends City of Miami Beach’s Alcohol Sales Ordinance at the Third District Court of Appeals appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

In the lower court, the Town of Indian River Shores invoked Florida’s Anti-SLAPP statute, pursuant to which a defendant can file a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment, which must be heard by the court “at the earliest possible time.” The provision was created with the intention to prohibit lawsuits brought against individuals for exercising their right of free speech in connection with a public issue or their rights to peacefully assemble. 

This initially led to Ed’s client’s lawsuit being dismissed, but Fourth District Court of Appeal Judges Jeffrey T. Kuntz and Dorian K. Damoorgian held, “Crosby brought the claim against a governmental entity, the Town. The Circuit Court, therefore, erred when it allowed a governmental entity to rely on Florida’s Anti-SLAPP statute as the ground for granting its motion to dismiss. So we must reverse the circuit court’s dismissal with prejudice based on the Anti-SLAPP statute. Florida’s Anti-SLAPP statute protects the people, not the government.”

A Fellow of the prestigious American Academy of Appellate Lawyers and ranked by Chambers USA in appellate law, Ed Guedes is widely known for his representation of business and government clients in high-stakes appeals. He has litigated dozens of appeals before the Florida Supreme Court, Florida’s district courts of appeal and the U.S. Courts of Appeals in a wide variety of matters.

Daily Business Review (March 31, 2023) ‘Writing on a Blank Slate’: Florida Attorney Wins Anti- SLAPP Appeal in Case with No Precedent, Case Law

The post Partner Ed Guedes discusses with the Daily Business Review his recent appellate victory in an appeal involving Florida’s Anti-SLAPP statute appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

Last week, the Third District Court of Appeal quashed the Miami-Dade Circuit Court’s discovery order, which partially allowed a deposition of a corporate representative with respect to 150 areas of inquiry. The court reasoned that the deposition notice was impermissible, to the extent that it permitted corporate-wide discovery.  

“We’re starting to see certain law firms using this tactic as a bludgeon rather than a way to refine certain questions that need to be answered by a corporate representative,” Ed told the Daily Business Review in an article about his representation. “It has become a free-for-all, ‘We want access to all your company information on all these topics and you just better make somebody do it.’ We pushed back because that is not what the statute contemplates.” 

The court agreed with Ed, stating in its ruling that the tactic “amounts to impermissible carte blanche discovery that results in irreparable harm and departs from the essential requirements of the law.” The court also expressly held that plaintiffs suing for an accident caused by a transitory foreign substance are not permitted to proceed on a theory of negligent mode of operation.

“The decision provides stronger and clearer guidance to trial judges as to what is permissible in terms of discovery when you are dealing with these premises liability cases governed by the statute,” Ed said. “It has to be narrower; it cannot be the broad exploration that happened here.”

A Fellow of the prestigious American Academy of Appellate Lawyers and ranked by Chambers USA in appellate law, Ed Guedes is widely known for his representation of business and government clients in high-stakes appeals. He has litigated dozens of appeals before the Florida Supreme Court, Florida’s district courts of appeal and the U.S. Courts of Appeals in a wide variety of matters.

Daily Business Review (January 26, 2023) ‘Using This Tactic as a Bludgeon’: Appellate Court Rejects Corporate-Wide Discovery Order

The post Ed Guedes Successfully Overturns Corporate-Wide Discovery Order on Behalf of Publix Super Markets, Inc. appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

Representing dozens of Florida counties, municipalities, and elected officials, Ed argued that while the Legislature has the authority to preempt local laws substantively, it overstepped its authority by enacting a provision that could lead to fines against individual elected officials simply because they voted to enact ordinances that are later determined to be preempted by state statute.

“This is a legislative firehose to put out a birthday candle,” Ed argued.

Since 1987, Florida has barred cities and counties from passing regulations governing firearms and ammunition, and in 2011 a law that was designed to strengthen the 1987 preemption was passed. Ed argued the  penalties in the 2011 law are unconstitutional, in part, because they violate legislative immunity and governmental function immunity for local elected officials and their governments. Also, Ed argued that the penalties violate the constitutional separation of powers doctrine because it would lead to courts delving into the motivations or intentions of local elected officials.

Ed’s representation of the municipalities was covered in several media outlets across Florida. 

Click here and here to read the Miami Herald articles. 

Click here to read the Sun Sentinel article.

Click here to read the Politico article.

Click here to read the Florida Politics article. 

Click here to read the Florida Phoenix.

Click here to read the NewsRadio WFLA article.

Click here to read the WLRN article. 

Click here to read the ABC Action News article.

Click here to read the CBS News article.

Click here to read the WINK article.

Click here to read the 99.1 WQIK – iHeart article. 

Click here to read the Bradenton Herald article.

Click here to read the Patch article.

Click here to read the South Florida Reporter article.

Click here to read the Boca Raton magazine article.

Click here to read the Florida Record.

The post Ed Guedes argues before the Florida Supreme Court to overturn local government penalties in state gun law appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

The first appeal involved Hialeah’s and the County’s efforts to connect a roadway from Hialeah, over I-75, and into the Town of Miami Lakes without the Town’s input. The new road was sought to service the transportation needs of a Lennar Development in Hialeah, which requirement Hialeah included in Lennar’s development agreement. However, the Town and the County had years ago entered into a road transfer agreement, pursuant to which the County transferred to the Town all responsibility for the planning, design, maintenance, construction and future alteration of the roads in the Town, including the one to which Hialeah and the County wanted to connect the proposed road. However, neither Hialeah, the County, Lennar nor their contractors sought the Town’s approval before beginning construction of the road and defacing the Town’s road. The trial court dismissed the complaint with prejudice finding that the road transfer agreement did not confer the contested rights on the Town. The Third District reversed and remanded the case for further proceedings, but required that FDOT be added as a defendant because of the involvement of I-75.

Read the opinion here.

In the second appeal, the Miami-Dade County School Board issued a request for proposal to qualified insurance companies to provide risk management services to the school district. The selection committee initially recommended an award of the contract to Marsh USA, but Arthur J. Gallagher Risk Management Services, a competing bidder, protested the recommendation. The School Board opted not to award the contract to anyone and re-opened the bidding, in which Marsh continued to participate. Marsh appealed the School Board’s decision, but did not protest the reopening (or the subsequent award of the contract to Gallagher). We argued on behalf of the School Board that Marsh had waived its right to pursue its appeal because it willingly participated in the re-opening of the bids and continued competition for award of the contract. The Third District agreed and dismissed the appeal.

Read the opinion here. 

The post Ed Guedes wins two appeals at the Third District Court of Appeal in the same day appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

Read the opinion: Opinion
.

The post Edward Guedes wins Fourth District Court of Appeal case on behalf of Sedano’s appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

“Here, the ratio appears to be around 15 to one, which raises an eyebrow, so to speak, but doesn’t scream denial of due process,” Ed said in an email. “It’s possible that there was sufficient evidence of extremely egregious conduct on the part of 3M that would help support the greater than single-digit ratio.”

Ed further explained the question is not whether the compensatory damages were low, but if the punitive damages are excessively high, referencing Supreme Court rulings  Pacific Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Haslip and BMW of North America v. Gore. In the former case, the ratio of punitive damages to compensatory damages was roughly four to one, and the highest court in the country upheld it, Ed said. However, in the latter, the ratio was 500 to one, and was deemed constitutionally defective by the U.S. high court.

So far, juries have ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in four separate trials. In one of the prior trials, the ratio of punitive to compensatory damages was about nine to one, which Ed said is less potentially objectionable “from a due process perspective,” because it is a single-digit ratio.

Click here to read more.

The post Edward G. Guedes discusses how 3M earplug verdict raises questions about punitive awards versus compensatory damages appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.