Allen v. Allen

873 So. 2d 1259, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 7566, 2004 WL 1176268
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 28, 2004·No. No. 1D04-0794·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We conclude that the facts alleged in petitioner’s third motion for disqualification, taken as true, were sufficient to establish a well-grounded fear on the part of petitioner that she would not receive a fair -and impartial hearing before the trial judge. Accordingly, the petition for writ of prohibition is granted, and on remand, a new judge shall be assigned to hear further proceedings in this matter. '

KAHN, WEBSTER and BROWNING, JJ., concur. '

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Allen v. Allen, 873 So. 2d 1259, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 7566, 2004 WL 1176268 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

873 So. 2d 1259 (Allen v. Allen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Blake v. State
873 So. 2d 1259 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)