GUZMAN & COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND LEOPOLDO E. GUZMAN, PETITIONERS,
v.
BRITISH REALTY & MORTGAGE CORP., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, M SECURITIES INVESTMENT, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS HOWARD GARY & COMPANY, MANUBHAI L. PAREKH, KISHOR M. PAREKH AND JOHN DOES ONE THROUGH THIRTEEN, RESPONDENTS

Fla. 3d DCA | 1997-10-01
No. 97-2559
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and GODERICH and SORONDO, JJ.
699 So. 2d 842 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1997) Positive Treatment
Cited by 16 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The Petitioners seek a writ of prohibition ordering the trial judge to disqualify herself from further involvement in this case based on comments she made during a hearing which took place on June 26, 1997. We do not reach the merits of the Petitioners’ argument because we conclude that the motion to disqualify the trial judge was not timely filed.

Rule 2.160(e) of the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration requires a motion to disqualify a trial judge to be filed “within a reasonable time not to exceed 10 days after discovery of the facts constituting the grounds for the motion.” In the present case the allegedly disqualifying comments by the judge were made on June 26, 1997. The motion to disqualify was filed on July 18, 1997, 22 days after “discovery of the facts constituting the grounds for the motion.” McGauley v. Goldstein, 653 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Foley v. Fleet, 644 So. 2d 551 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Parnell v. State, 627 So. 2d 1246 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993).

The Amended Petition for Writ of Prohibition is denied.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • HIP Health Plan OF Fla., Inc. v. Sandi Griffin, 757 So. 2d 1272 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
    …decisions have referred to the “filing” of the motion, rather than “service” of the motion, in discussing the timeliness of a motion. See, e.g., Carter v. Howey, 707 So. 2d 906, 907 (Fla. 6th DCA 1998); Guzman & Co. v. British Realty & Mortg. Corp., 699 So. 2d 842, 842 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Foley v. Fleet, 644 So. 2d 551, 551-52 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). The same language as is found in Rule 2.160 also appears in Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b), which requires that “[t]he motion shall be made within a reasonable t…
  • Guerra v. Tona Guerra, 716 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13, 16 (Fla.1976); Guzman & Co. v. British Realty & Mortgage Corp., 699 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Skipper v. Skipper, 654 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); Knecht v. Knecht, 629 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), review denied, 639 So. 2d 978 (Fla.1994); Kaufman v. Kaufman, 491 So. 2d 584 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Richardson v. Richardso…
  • …PER CURIAM. We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s order sequestering rents. See Whud Real Estate Ltd. P’ship v. Oak Grove, Ltd., 699 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). Lack of standing is an affirmative defense to foreclosure. See, e.g., Glynn v. First Union Nat’l Bank, 912 So. 2d 357, 358 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). Section 697.07(4), Florida Statutes (2011), provides that a court may order sequestra…

Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw