Attorney Alex Rosenthal
Attorney Alex Rosenthal was born in Miami, Florida. In July 2012, Mr. Rosenthal started
Rosenthal Law Group where he continued his practice, along with his longstanding staff and
associates. Mr. Rosenthal's practice areas include business counseling
and transactions and state and federal
commercial litigation with an emphasis on:
Background and Experience
Before forming his own law firm, he worked for two years in the Miami office
of Stroock & Stroock & Lavan and then worked several years with
the firm of Britton, Weissman, Lichtman & Dervishi, P.A.
Mr. Rosenthal's litigation practice extends statewide in both state
and federal courts, and he acts as a certified arbitrator in the Seventeenth
Judicial Circuit, in and for Broward County, Florida.
- Florida Bar
- United States District Courts for the Southern District of Florida
- United States District Courts for the Middle District of Florida
- United States District Courts for the Northern District of Florida
- The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals
- The United States Supreme Court
- Litigation Counsel of America (Fellow)
Lawyers of Distinction (2017)
University of Virginia (1986)
University of Florida College of Law (1989)
- Juris Doctorate
- Graduated with honors
- Served on law school's Journal of Law and Public Policy
- Interned for United States Magistrate Judge William C. Turnoff
Professional Accolades and Honors
AV Rated by Martindale-Hubbell
The Best Lawyers in America® in the field of
Commercial Litigation (2010-2019)
The Best Lawyers in America® in the field of Litigation-Construction category (2016-2019)
Business Lawyer of the Year by
Corporate America (2016)
Florida's Commercial Landlord-Tenant Litigator of the Year by
Acquisition International (2016)
- Named to the exclusive list of U.S. News – Best Lawyers® Best
Law Firms (2018)
10.0 Superb rating by
- Recognized in the Miami Herald as one of South Florida's Top Lawyers
M&A Award by
Corporate Livewire for "Excellence in Business Litigation Law — FL, USA." (2017)
- Finance Monthly Global Award (2017)
- Lawyer Monthly of Legal Awards (2017)
- Named to Florida Trend Magazine's "Legal Elite" 2019
- Lawyers of Distinction (2020)
"Most Outstanding Law Firm of 2016" from
Wealth & Finance International
- Best Business Law Firm in Miami (2016)
- America’s Top 100 Bet-the-Company Litigators® for 2019
Outside of work, Mr. Rosenthal's interest include competitive health
and fitness activities, volunteering for several organizations, travel
and leisure time with his family, and nervously watching his daughters'
equestrian jumping competitions.
Mr. Rosenthal handles trial and appellate issues before both state and
federal courts where he has obtained several precedent setting decisions
United States v. Estelle Stein, 881 F.3d 853 (11th Cir. 2018), an
en banc decision of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals overruling more than
thirty years of precedent in the Eleventh Circuit which previously held
that a taxpayer could not overcome the presumption of correctness in favor
of the IRS to defeat a summary judgment motion solely by filing an uncorroborated
self-serving affidavit. The Eleventh Circuit held that an otherwise admissible
affidavit is sufficient to defeat summary judgment even though it is self-serving
Inside the Art of Craftmanship Corp. v. Design Center of the Americas,
2018 WL 443897, --- So3d. --- (Fla. 4th DCA 2018), a case where the appellate court affirmed a final judgment
of possession entered against a commercial tenant who failed to deposit
rent into the court registry pending the resolution of the case even though
the court was closed on the due date.
Acquisition Trust Company, LLC v. Laurel Pinebrook, LLC, 226 So.3d 325
(Fla. 2d DCA 2017),
reh. denied, a successful appeal of a trial court’s dismissal with prejudice
without leave to amend in a case involving a claim of an improper exercise
of a right of first refusal.
Yellow Cab Company v. Ewing by and through Jones, 225 So.2d 302 (Fla 3d
DCA 2017), dismissal of an untimely appeal of an amended final judgment
correcting a scrivener’s error.
Gunter v. Sprintcom, Inc., 2016 WL 1619892 (M.D. Fla. April 15, 2016),
wherein the Court granted the client’s (Sprintcom, Inc.) motion
to compel arbitration and to stay the litigation based on the arbitration
agreement contained in the Terms and Conditions of Service.
Almany Investors, Ltd. V. Nextel South Corp., 2015 WL 74091 (S.D. Fla.
2015), a case which awarded summary judgment in favor of Nextel South
Corp. confirming its right to terminate Communications Site Lease Agreement
which contained a clause entitling Nextel to terminate the Lease if "it
determined that the Premises [were] not appropriate for its operations
for economic or technological reasons." Nextel exercised its right
of termination after the shutdown of its iDEN network in June 2013, yet
Almany disagreed with Nextel's right to terminate and filed suit.
The summary judgment was granted by United State District Judge Federico
Design Center of the Americas, LLC v. Mike Bell, Inc., 254 F. Supp.3d 1339
(S.D. Fla. 2014), a case which clarified that a defendant cannot seek
removal to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction if the amount
in the complaint is not alleged to be more than $75,000 and the sole basis
for the removal is the amount at issue in the defendant's counterclaim.
The decision was the first published opinion in the Southern District
of Florida that clarified the rule that the counterclaim is irrelevant
when determining the amount in controversy in a removal setting.
In re Turner, 519 B.R. 354 (Bkrtcy. S.D. Fla. 2014), a case which awarded
Rule 11 sanctions in favor of a creditor represented by Mr. Rosenthal
and against a Chapter 13 debtor and his attorney for filing a Chapter
13 bankruptcy petition when the debtor was not eligible for Chapter 13
bankruptcy and who filed inaccurate schedules.
Harty v. SRA/Palm Trails Plaza, LLC, 755 F.Supp.2d 1215 (S.D. Fla. 2010),
a case which clarified that an ADA plaintiff lacks standing to complain
about barriers that he did not encounter and is not entitled to perform
a post-filing inspection of areas within a property that were not encountered
by him prior to the filing of the complaint
Maya v. Omnicare, Inc., 2010 WL 2889569 (S.D. Fla. 2010), a case which
clarified that a defendant cannot seek removal to federal court based
on diversity jurisdiction if the amount in controversy is merely based
Martin v. Florida Power and Light Co., 909 So.2d 555 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005),
the first case in Florida to establish the duty of utilities in underground
Briceno v. Sprint Spectrum, L.P., 911 So.2d 176, (Fla. 3d DCA 2005), a case involving the ability to bind
parties to standard contractual terms posted on the internet
Watson v. Adecco Employment Services, Inc., 252 F.Supp.2d 1347 (M.D. Fla.
2003), one of the first cases ever to establish the limitation on liability
of a temporary staffing firm for discrimination against a temporary employee
J & P Transp., Inc. v. Fidelity and Cas. Co. of New York, 750 So.2d
752 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), the first Florida case to establish the automatic
trebled civil damages following a criminal conviction for theft; and
- Enriquillo Export & Import, Inc. v. M.B.R. Industries, Inc., 733 So.2d
1124 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), the first Florida case to clarify that payment
by check does not constitute payment when mailed.