RICHARD FIGUEREDO
v.
ANA M. CORDERO
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 appellate court reversed a trial court's denial of a petition for revocation of probate because the incarcerated petitioner was not permitted to appear telephonically. The court held that incarcerated parties have a right to be heard in civil matters and trial courts should generally grant requests for telephonic hearings.
Yes, the incarcerated petitioner was improperly denied his right to be heard. An incarcerated party has a right to participate in civil matters telephonically, and trial courts should grant such requests absent good cause to deny them.
“An incarcerated party has a right to be heard in civil matters if the party has brought to the court’s attention his or her desire to appear personally or telephonically.”
Establishes the right of incarcerated individuals to participate in civil proceedings.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRichard Figueredo, an incarcerated individual, filed a petition for revocation of probate and a motion to appear telephonically at the hearing. The tr…
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 Petition For Revocation Of Probate cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Richard Figueredo appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for revocation of probate and asserts he was precluded from participating in the hearing. Figueredo, who is incarcerated, filed a motion on July 22, 2019, to appear telephonically at the hearing scheduled for August1, 2019. The record before us does not reflect that the trial court ruled on Figueredo’s motion to appear by telephone. On August1, 2019, the court denied the petition for revocation of probate based on Figueredo’s failure to appear. “An incarcerated party has a right to be heard in civil matters if the party has brought to the court’s attention his or her desire to appear personally or telephonically.” Butler v. Norton, 158 So. 3d 750, 751 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (quoting Garrett v. Pratt, 128 So. 3d 928, 928 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)). “When a party is incarcerated and cannot physically appear in a civil matter, the trial court normally should grant a request to hold necessary hearings by telephone, pursuant to the procedure outlined in Florida Rule of Judicial Administration [2.530], as an alternative to requiring that the inmate be transported to the hearing by the state.” Id. (quoting Johnson v. Johnson, 783 So. 2d 326, 327 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)); see Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.530(c).1 As the trial court did not issue any ruling regarding
Figueredo’s motion, we reverse and remand for further proceedings to include permitting him to file another motion for telephonic hearing.
Reversed and remanded.
communication equipment in a scheduled motion hearing; however, any such request (except in criminal, juvenile, and appellate proceedings) must be granted, absent a showing of good cause to deny the same, where the hearing is set for not longer than 15 minutes.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Johnson v. Johnson, 783 So. 2d 326 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Garrett v. Pratt, 128 So. 3d 928 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)
- Butler v. Shakeria Norton, 158 So. 3d 750 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)