Supreme Court of Florida ______________
No. SC21-1542 ______________
IN RE: TRIAL COURT CERTIFICATION OF NEED FOR ADDITIONAL JUDGES.
November 24, 2021
PER CURIAM.
This opinion fulfills our constitutional obligation to determine
the State’s need for additional judges in fiscal year 2022/2023 and
to certify our “findings and recommendations concerning such
need” to the Florida Legislature. 1 Certification is “the sole
1. Article V, section 9 of the Florida Constitution provides in pertinent part:
Determination of number of judges.—The supreme court shall establish by rule uniform criteria for the determination of the need for additional judges except supreme court justices, the necessity for decreasing the number of judges and for increasing, decreasing or redefining appellate districts and judicial circuits. If the supreme court finds that a need exists for increasing or decreasing the number of judges or increasing, decreasing or redefining appellate districts and judicial circuits, it shall, prior to the next regular session of the mechanism established by our constitution for a systematic and
uniform assessment of this need.” In re Certification of Need for
Additional Judges, 889 So. 2d 734, 735 (Fla. 2004).
In this opinion we certify the need for one additional county
court judgeship in Lake County and no additional circuit court
judgeships. We decertify no county or circuit judgeships. The
Court addresses certification of need for additional appellate judges
in a separate opinion. 2
To make this decision on trial court certification, the Court
continues to use a verified objective weighted caseload methodology
as a primary basis for assessing judicial need.3 The objective data
are supplemented by judgeship requests submitted by the trial
courts, including descriptions of the impact of various secondary
legislature, certify to the legislature its findings and recommendations concerning such need.
2. See In re Redefinition of Appellate Districts and Certification of Need for Additional Appellate Judges, No. SC21-1543 (Fla. Nov. 24, 2021).
3. Our certification methodology relies primarily on case weights and calculations of available judge time to determine the need for additional trial court judges. See Fla. R. Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.240.
-2- factors. These secondary factors reflect local differences identified
by each chief judge in support of their requests for more judgeships
or in support of their requests for this Court not to decertify
judgeships in situations where the objective case weights alone
would indicate excess judicial capacity. Applying the criteria in this
two-step methodology, we conclude that Lake County has a
demonstrable need for an additional county court judgeship.
Considered in isolation, the two-step analysis also suggested
the decertification of two county court judgeships in Brevard
County and one county court judgeship each in Alachua, Citrus,
Collier, and Monroe counties. However, similar to our certification
opinion for fiscal year 2021/2022 and as further explained below,
this Court has determined that the significant workload and
operational challenges and the uncertainty facing the trial courts
weigh against decertification of any trial court judgeships at this
time.
Specifically, the effect of the Coronavirus Disease 2019
(COVID-19) pandemic on the circuit and county courts has been
significant. Over the course of the last year and a half, trial courts
have adapted court operations in response to the COVID-19
-3- pandemic to keep courts open and continue to provide for the
resolution of disputes. Despite the trial courts’ efforts to leverage
remote appearance technology and employ innovative solutions to
hear cases, an increase in pending workload is currently affecting
the courts as they resume normal operations. The additional
caseload is attributed to: proceedings in cases that existed before
the pandemic which necessarily were suspended or delayed to
protect public health and safety, proceedings in cases filed during
the pandemic that are pending, and cases that were anticipated to
be filed but that were delayed in being filed due to the onset of the
pandemic. Upon recommendation of the Trial Court Budget
Commission, the State Courts System’s fiscal year 2022/2023
legislative budget request identifies the continued need for
temporary adjudicatory and case support resources to address this
workload, such as senior judges, magistrates, law clerks, and case
managers. The court system is committed to addressing this
pandemic-generated workload expeditiously and is grateful to the
Legislature for appropriating, and to the Governor for approving,
significant temporary funding in fiscal year 2021/2022 for the first
year of the trial courts’ multi-year pandemic recovery plan. In the
-4- face of this workload, all existing judicial resources will be needed
to contribute to the pandemic-recovery effort.
The monetary jurisdiction change in county court is an
additional issue limiting this Court’s ability to accurately project
judicial need. Chapter 2019-58, section 9, Laws of Florida,
increased the dollar amount threshold for the jurisdiction of the
county court. The Legislature took a phased approach to the
implementation of this statutory revision. Effective January 1,
2020, county court monetary jurisdiction increased from an upper
limit of $15,000 to $30,000, and it is scheduled for a second
increase to $50,000 on January 1, 2023. The initial jurisdictional
increase in county court increased the workload in the county
courts. This initial jurisdictional change, however, largely coincided
with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and it is not yet possible
to determine precisely how this statutory revision will affect
workload among the tiers of court. The impending county court
jurisdictional increase to $50,000 is expected to significantly
increase the number of cases heard in county court.
An additional consideration is the long-term impact of chapter
2020-61, sections 3 and 8, Laws of Florida, which transferred
-5- circuit court authority to hear appeals from county court final
orders and judgments in criminal misdemeanor cases and most
civil cases to the district courts of appeal, effective January 1, 2021.
The circuit courts continue to have limited appellate jurisdiction for
certain administrative decisions and certain county court decisions
entered in noncriminal infraction and other cases. These changes
have also affected the distribution of judicial workload between the
circuit and appellate courts. However, due to the uncertainty
surrounding trial and appellate court filings as a result of the
pandemic, it is difficult to determine the ultimate result of this
legislative change, as well.
Further, this Court is mindful of the need to update the
current judicial workload assessment. Since 1999, this Court has
relied on the weighted caseload method to help determine the need
for judges in each circuit and county court. Over time, changes in
statutory and case law, court rules, technology, and legal practice
can affect the amount of judicial work associated with resolving
various types of cases.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Supreme Court of Florida ______________
No. SC21-1542 ______________
IN RE: TRIAL COURT CERTIFICATION OF NEED FOR ADDITIONAL JUDGES.
November 24, 2021
PER CURIAM.
This opinion fulfills our constitutional obligation to determine
the State’s need for additional judges in fiscal year 2022/2023 and
to certify our “findings and recommendations concerning such
need” to the Florida Legislature. 1 Certification is “the sole
1. Article V, section 9 of the Florida Constitution provides in pertinent part:
Determination of number of judges.—The supreme court shall establish by rule uniform criteria for the determination of the need for additional judges except supreme court justices, the necessity for decreasing the number of judges and for increasing, decreasing or redefining appellate districts and judicial circuits. If the supreme court finds that a need exists for increasing or decreasing the number of judges or increasing, decreasing or redefining appellate districts and judicial circuits, it shall, prior to the next regular session of the mechanism established by our constitution for a systematic and
uniform assessment of this need.” In re Certification of Need for
Additional Judges, 889 So. 2d 734, 735 (Fla. 2004).
In this opinion we certify the need for one additional county
court judgeship in Lake County and no additional circuit court
judgeships. We decertify no county or circuit judgeships. The
Court addresses certification of need for additional appellate judges
in a separate opinion. 2
To make this decision on trial court certification, the Court
continues to use a verified objective weighted caseload methodology
as a primary basis for assessing judicial need.3 The objective data
are supplemented by judgeship requests submitted by the trial
courts, including descriptions of the impact of various secondary
legislature, certify to the legislature its findings and recommendations concerning such need.
2. See In re Redefinition of Appellate Districts and Certification of Need for Additional Appellate Judges, No. SC21-1543 (Fla. Nov. 24, 2021).
3. Our certification methodology relies primarily on case weights and calculations of available judge time to determine the need for additional trial court judges. See Fla. R. Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.240.
-2- factors. These secondary factors reflect local differences identified
by each chief judge in support of their requests for more judgeships
or in support of their requests for this Court not to decertify
judgeships in situations where the objective case weights alone
would indicate excess judicial capacity. Applying the criteria in this
two-step methodology, we conclude that Lake County has a
demonstrable need for an additional county court judgeship.
Considered in isolation, the two-step analysis also suggested
the decertification of two county court judgeships in Brevard
County and one county court judgeship each in Alachua, Citrus,
Collier, and Monroe counties. However, similar to our certification
opinion for fiscal year 2021/2022 and as further explained below,
this Court has determined that the significant workload and
operational challenges and the uncertainty facing the trial courts
weigh against decertification of any trial court judgeships at this
time.
Specifically, the effect of the Coronavirus Disease 2019
(COVID-19) pandemic on the circuit and county courts has been
significant. Over the course of the last year and a half, trial courts
have adapted court operations in response to the COVID-19
-3- pandemic to keep courts open and continue to provide for the
resolution of disputes. Despite the trial courts’ efforts to leverage
remote appearance technology and employ innovative solutions to
hear cases, an increase in pending workload is currently affecting
the courts as they resume normal operations. The additional
caseload is attributed to: proceedings in cases that existed before
the pandemic which necessarily were suspended or delayed to
protect public health and safety, proceedings in cases filed during
the pandemic that are pending, and cases that were anticipated to
be filed but that were delayed in being filed due to the onset of the
pandemic. Upon recommendation of the Trial Court Budget
Commission, the State Courts System’s fiscal year 2022/2023
legislative budget request identifies the continued need for
temporary adjudicatory and case support resources to address this
workload, such as senior judges, magistrates, law clerks, and case
managers. The court system is committed to addressing this
pandemic-generated workload expeditiously and is grateful to the
Legislature for appropriating, and to the Governor for approving,
significant temporary funding in fiscal year 2021/2022 for the first
year of the trial courts’ multi-year pandemic recovery plan. In the
-4- face of this workload, all existing judicial resources will be needed
to contribute to the pandemic-recovery effort.
The monetary jurisdiction change in county court is an
additional issue limiting this Court’s ability to accurately project
judicial need. Chapter 2019-58, section 9, Laws of Florida,
increased the dollar amount threshold for the jurisdiction of the
county court. The Legislature took a phased approach to the
implementation of this statutory revision. Effective January 1,
2020, county court monetary jurisdiction increased from an upper
limit of $15,000 to $30,000, and it is scheduled for a second
increase to $50,000 on January 1, 2023. The initial jurisdictional
increase in county court increased the workload in the county
courts. This initial jurisdictional change, however, largely coincided
with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and it is not yet possible
to determine precisely how this statutory revision will affect
workload among the tiers of court. The impending county court
jurisdictional increase to $50,000 is expected to significantly
increase the number of cases heard in county court.
An additional consideration is the long-term impact of chapter
2020-61, sections 3 and 8, Laws of Florida, which transferred
-5- circuit court authority to hear appeals from county court final
orders and judgments in criminal misdemeanor cases and most
civil cases to the district courts of appeal, effective January 1, 2021.
The circuit courts continue to have limited appellate jurisdiction for
certain administrative decisions and certain county court decisions
entered in noncriminal infraction and other cases. These changes
have also affected the distribution of judicial workload between the
circuit and appellate courts. However, due to the uncertainty
surrounding trial and appellate court filings as a result of the
pandemic, it is difficult to determine the ultimate result of this
legislative change, as well.
Further, this Court is mindful of the need to update the
current judicial workload assessment. Since 1999, this Court has
relied on the weighted caseload method to help determine the need
for judges in each circuit and county court. Over time, changes in
statutory and case law, court rules, technology, and legal practice
can affect the amount of judicial work associated with resolving
various types of cases. For this reason, the Florida Rules of General
Practice and Judicial Administration call for the review of the
weighted caseload model and the consideration of adjustments to
-6- that model no less than every five years. To have multi-year utility,
however, such an assessment, which entails investment of
considerable time by judges and staff as well as considerable
expense, should not be conducted in a significantly anomalous
environment affecting the number of filings or the typical time to
dispose of a case. Therefore, in light of the pandemic’s ongoing
operational impacts and the uncertainty about the full effect of
recent statutory changes, the court system delayed initiation of the
judicial workload assessment. This Court is considering initiating
an update to the judicial workload assessment in the near future.
Having conducted a quantitative assessment of trial court
judicial workload and having also considered various qualitative
factors, workload trends related to the COVID-19 pandemic, and
jurisdictional changes, we certify the need for one additional county
court judgeship in Florida, as set forth in the appendix to this
opinion. We also recommend no decertification of circuit court or
county court judgeships.
The current complement of trial court judgeships, along with
other resources requested through a legislative budget request for
fiscal year 2022/2023, will assist the judicial branch in meeting
-7- demands associated with the pandemic-generated workload and
court jurisdictional changes.
It is so ordered.
CANADY, C.J., and POLSTON, LABARGA, LAWSON, MUÑIZ, COURIEL, and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur.
Original Proceeding – Trial Court Certification of Need for Additional Judges
-8- APPENDIX Trial Court Need
Circuit County Court Court Certified Certified Circuit Judges County Judges 1 0 N/A 0 2 0 N/A 0 3 0 N/A 0 4 0 N/A 0 5 0 Lake 1 6 0 N/A 0 7 0 N/A 0 8 0 N/A 0 9 0 N/A 0 10 0 N/A 0 11 0 N/A 0 12 0 N/A 0 13 0 N/A 0 14 0 N/A 0 15 0 N/A 0 16 0 N/A 0 17 0 N/A 0 18 0 N/A 0 19 0 N/A 0 20 0 N/A 0 Total 0 Total 1
-9-