Catasus v. Tabone
This text of 19 So. 3d 427 (Catasus v. Tabone) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Having agreed to recuse himself in a related proceeding because of a voluntarily-revealed personal relationship with parties in the lawsuit, the trial judge should have granted a motion for disqualification in this separate case involving those same parties.1 See Steinhorst v. State, 636 So.2d 498 (Fla.1994); Houck v. State, 669 So.2d 1131 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). The present application for prohibition requiring his disqualification is therefore granted. [428]*428We are certain that issuance of the formal writ will not be necessary.
Prohibition granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
19 So. 3d 427, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 14101, 2009 WL 3012812, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/catasus-v-tabone-fladistctapp-2009.