IN RE: AMENDMENT TO FLORIDA RULE OF GENERAL PRACTICE AND JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION 2.215
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court amended Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.215 to remove the requirement for a circuit chief judge to seek approval from an outside circuit chief judge before requesting the Chief Justice to assign additional judges. This change aims to eliminate the appearance of impropriety, particularly when recusal is involved.
Yes, the rule should be amended. The requirement for approval from an outside circuit chief judge is removed to prevent the appearance of impropriety and to align with the Chief Justice's constitutional authority to assign judges.
[1] The Chief Justice of the Florida Supreme Court possesses the constitutional authority to assign justices or judges to temporary duty in any court for which they are quali…
[2] A circuit court chief judge may request the Chief Justice to assign additional judges from outside the circuit without first obtaining approval from the chief judge of th…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Specifically, we amend rule 2.215(b)(4) to remove the requirement that a chief judge of a circuit court seek the approval of the outside circuit chief judge before requesting the Chief Justice of this Court to temporarily assign an additional judge or judges from the outside circuit to duty in the requesting court.”
This quote directly states the amendment being made to the rule.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Florida Supreme Court, on its own motion, considered amending Rule 2.215(b)(4) of the Florida Rules of General Practice and Judicial Administratio…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Assignment Of Judges cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The Court, on its own motion, amends Florida Rule of General
Practice and Judicial Administration 2.215 (Trial Court
Administration). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const.; Fla. R. Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.140(d).
Specifically, we amend rule 2.215(b)(4) to remove the requirement that a chief judge of a circuit court seek the approval of the outside circuit chief judge before requesting the Chief Justice of this Court to temporarily assign an additional judge or judges from the outside circuit to duty in the requesting court. The amendment is intended to eliminate the appearance of any impropriety that the requesting court is choosing the outside judge or judges,
particularly in the context of the recusal of the requesting court. This amendment also is consistent with article V, section (2)(b) of the Florida Constitution, which provides that the Chief Justice of this Court “shall have the power to assign justices or judges,
including consenting retired justices or judges, to temporary duty in any court for which the judge is qualified.”
Accordingly, we amend the Florida Rules of General Practice and Judicial Administration as reflected in the appendix to this opinion. Deletions are indicated by struck-through type. The amendment shall become effective immediately. Because the amendment was not published for comment previously, interested persons shall have seventy-five days from the date of this opinion in which to file comments with the Court. 1
1. All comments must be filed with the Court on or before July 26, 2022, as well as a separate request for oral argument if the person filing the comment wishes to participate in oral argument, which may be scheduled in this case. If filed by an attorney in good standing with The Florida Bar, the comment must be electronically filed via the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal (Portal) in accordance with In re Electronic Filing in the Supreme Court of Florida via the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal, Fla. Admin. Order No. AOSC13-7 (Feb. 18, 2013). If filed by a nonlawyer or a lawyer not licensed to practice in Florida, the comment may be, but is not required to be, filed via the Portal. Any person unable to submit a comment electronically must mail or hand-deliver the originally signed comment to the Florida Supreme Court, Office of the Clerk, 500
-2-It is so ordered.
CANADY, C.J., and POLSTON, LABARGA, LAWSON, MUÑIZ, COURIEL, and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur. THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR REHEARING SHALL NOT ALTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS AMENDMENT.