Levine v. Crosby

552 So. 2d 244, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2549, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6101, 1989 WL 129813
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedNovember 2, 1989
DocketNo. 89-1789
StatusPublished

This text of 552 So. 2d 244 (Levine v. Crosby) 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.

Bluebook
Levine v. Crosby, 552 So. 2d 244, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2549, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6101, 1989 WL 129813 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Opinion

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This matter is before the court upon a petition for writ of prohibition. We decline to issue the writ because both parties have informed us that the respondent trial judge has recused himself from the case.1 Thus the matter is moot.

We decline to review the order denying a motion to strike an ex parte letter written by a witness to the judge. That letter and the witness can be either disregarded by the new trial judge, or petitioner can cross-examine, attempt to impeach or otherwise deal with the communication within the rules of evidence and civil trial procedure when this matter is considered at final hearing. Should petitioner still feel ag[245]*245grieved he may then appeal any adverse rulings by way of plenary appeal.

WRIT DENIED.

SHARP and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
552 So. 2d 244, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2549, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6101, 1989 WL 129813, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/levine-v-crosby-fladistctapp-1989.