IN RE: AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA RULE OF GENERAL PRACTICE AND JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION 2.240
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 2.240 concerning the determination of the need for additional trial judges. The amendments expand the factors the Court can consider, including the composition of a jurisdiction and prosecutorial practices, as well as introducing new workload factors like problem-solving courts, technology use, and election canvassing board participation.
Yes, the Florida Supreme Court amended Rule 2.240 to include new factors and expand existing ones for determining the need for additional trial judges. These changes aim to provide a more comprehensive assessment of judicial workload.
[1] The Supreme Court of Florida may consider the geographical composition of a jurisdiction, including the location of relevant facilities, when determining the need for add…
[2] Prosecutorial practices, in addition to law enforcement practices, may be considered by the Supreme Court when assessing judicial workload and the need for additional jud…
Previewing 2 of 5 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“New language is added to rule 2.240(b)(1)(B), which sets out a list of secondary factors this Court may consider when determining if additional trial judges are needed in a particular jurisdiction.”
Explains the modification to the secondary factors for determining the need for additional judges.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Trial Court Performance and Accountability Commission (TCP&A) proposed amendments to Rule 2.240(b)(1)(B) and 2.240(c) in response to a court direc…
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 Judicial Administration cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This matter is before the Court for consideration of proposed amendments to Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.240. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const. On November 17, 2021, the Trial Court Performance and Accountability Commission (TCP&A) filed a report proposing amendments to rules 2.240(b)(1)(B) and 2.240(c). The TCP&A’s report was in response to a directive by this Court to study a 2016 report by the Judicial Needs Assessment Committee, to review rules 2.240(b)(1)(B) and 2.240(c) in light of that report, and to suggest any necessary modifications. This Court previously published the proposed amendments for comment, and no comments were received.
Having considered the proposed amendments, the Court hereby amends rule 2.240. New language is added to rule 2.240(b)(1)(B), which sets out a list of secondary factors this Court may consider when determining if additional trial judges are needed in a particular jurisdiction. Specifically, subdivision (b)(1)(B)(vii) is amended to allow this Court to consider not only the geographical size of a jurisdiction but also its composition, including the location of relevant facilities within that jurisdiction. Subdivision (b)(1)(B)(viii) is amended to allow the Court to consider not only law enforcement practices that can affect judicial workload but also prosecutorial practices.
Also, three new subdivisions are added to rule 2.240(c), which sets out additional trial court workload factors for the Court to consider in addition to the statistical criteria articulated in subdivision (b). Specifically, new subdivisions (c)(12)-(14) now allow the Court to consider the impact of problem-solving courts, the development and use of technology and necessary training in its use, and participation in election canvassing boards.
Accordingly, we hereby amend Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.240 (Determination of Need for -2-Additional Judges), as reflected in the appendix to this opinion.
New language is indicated by underscoring; deletions are indicated by struck-through type. The amendments to the rule shall become effective immediately.
It is so ordered.
MUÑIZ, C.J., and CANADY, POLSTON, LABARGA, COURIEL, and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur. THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR REHEARING SHALL NOT ALTER