Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Inc. v. Alexander

51 So. 3d 644, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 417, 2011 WL 198383
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJanuary 24, 2011
Docket1D10-6377
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 51 So. 3d 644 (Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Inc. v. Alexander) 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
Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Inc. v. Alexander, 51 So. 3d 644, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 417, 2011 WL 198383 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

*645 PER CURIAM.

This court concludes that the defendant’s motion for disqualification, which was based upon comments by the trial judge at a hearing on plaintiff’s motion for sanctions that she had faith “as long as my fingernail” that the defendant had produced documents sought by the plaintiff, was both timely and legally sufficient. See Brown v. St. George Island Ltd., 561 So.2d 253 (Fla.1990); Campbell Soup Co. v. Roberts, 676 So.2d 435 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Parsons, 644 So.2d 340 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). We grant the petition for writ of prohibition and remand the cause to the circuit court with directions that the motion for disqualification be granted and a new judge assigned to preside over the cause.

PETITION GRANTED.

VAN NORTWICK, LEWIS, and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.

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

Related

CLAVELLE v. State
51 So. 3d 644 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
51 So. 3d 644, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 417, 2011 WL 198383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tallahassee-memorial-healthcare-inc-v-alexander-fladistctapp-2011.