Moody v. Moody

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Moody v. Moody

705 So. 2d 708, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 1254, 1998 WL 58171

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 13, 1998

DocketNo. 97-4784

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 705 So. 2d 708 (Moody v. Moody) 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

Moody v. Moody, 705 So. 2d 708, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 1254, 1998 WL 58171 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Sarah Moody petitions this court for a writ of mandamus. She and her husband are currently parties to a dissolution action in Nassau County. Mrs. Moody has moved for the disqualification of the presiding judge and the motion has been pending for over four months.

A writ of mandamus may issue to require a timely ruling on a matter pending before a lower tribunal. See Flagship National Bank v. Testa, 429 So.2d 69 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). The purpose of the writ is not to require a particular outcome, only that action be taken. Kramp v. Fagan, 568 So.2d 479 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). We note that Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.160(e) contemplates an “immediate ruling” on a motion for judicial disqualification.

[709]*709The petition for writ of mandamus is granted and the Honorable Bill Parsons is directed to render an order on the motion for his disqualification within ten days of issu-anee of this opinion.

BARFIELD, C.J., and WEBSTER and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.

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