PEPSICO, INC., PEPSI-COLA COMPANY, AND NATIONAL BEVERAGES, INC., PETITIONERS,
v.
JUAN ROQUE, MARIO TEY AND OSCAR CARRO, RESPONDENTS
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.
Florida appellate court quashed trial court's denial of pro hac vice admission for Georgia-licensed attorneys representing PepsiCo, holding that prior Florida appearances and expertise in the subject matter support admission without arbitrary numerical limitations.
A trial court abuses its discretion in denying pro hac vice admission to foreign counsel with prior Florida appearances and specialized expertise in the type of litigation involved.
[1] A trial court abuses its discretion in denying pro hac vice admission to foreign counsel when the counsel has prior Florida appearances, specialized expertise in the subj…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“he was entitled to pro hac vice admission because he had represented the defendant in similar cases nationwide and had developed a particular expertise in the specialized field of litigation in which he was engaged”
Court's statement of the rule from State ex rel. H.K. Porter Co. v. White regarding entitlement to pro hac vice admission based on expertise and experience in specialized litigation.
PepsiCo and affiliated corporations were defendants in a wrongful termination action. Georgia-licensed attorneys sought pro hac vice admission; they h…
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 Pro Hac Vice Admission cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
Pepsico, Inc., and two affiliated corporations, who are the defendants in a wrongful termination of employment action, seek certiorari review of an order denying the admission pro hac vice, of lawyers on their behalf who are members of the Georgia, but not the Florida Bar. See Fla.R.Jud.Ad-min. 2.060(b). The attorneys in question had been admitted both to practice before the United States District Court in this very case prior to its remand to the state court and in Florida state courts on five previous occasions to represent Pepsico in the same type of action.
As in Keller Indus., Inc. v. Yoder, 625 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), we find no lawful basis upon which the trial court could have properly exercised its discretion to deny the application and therefore quash the order under review. There is no principled ground for distinguishing Keller, which involved three prior Florida appearances by foreign counsel, from this case, in which there were five. Indeed, we believe that the correct rule is stated in State ex rel. H.K. Porter Co. v. White, 182 W.Va. 97, 386 S.E. 2d 25 (1989), in which the court rejected the imposition of an arbitrary limitation on pro hac vice appearances and held, even though the nonresident lawyer had been assigned over one hundred cases in the jurisdiction, that he was entitled to pro hac vice admission because he had represented the defendant in similar cases nationwide and had developed a particular expertise in the specialized field of litigation in which he was engaged.
Certiorari granted.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ford Motor Co. v. Smith, 821 So. 2d 1084 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)…PER CURIAM. We grant the petition for writ of certio-rari and quash the trial court order denying the motion of petitioner’s attorney to appear pro hac vice. See Pepsico, Inc. v. Roque, 743 So. 2d 160 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Keller Indus., Inc. v. Yoder, 625 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). Certiorari granted; order quashed.…
-
Brooks v. AMP Servs. Ltd. for the Walter & Anna Bronner Tr., 979 So. 2d 435 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
-
THI Holdings, LLC v. Shattuck, 93 So. 3d 419 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)…s Armature Works, Inc., 658 So. 2d 646, 648 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). “Certiorari is available to review orders denying a motion to appear pro hac vice.” Brooks v. AMP Servs., Ltd., 979 So. 2d 435, 437 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008); see also Pepsico, Inc. v. Roque, 743 So. 2d 160,161 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (granting certiorari to review an order denying the admission of attorneys pro hac vice); Keller Indus., Inc. v. Yoder, 625 So. 2d 82, 82 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (same). The reason for this is a practical one: since neither the law…
Authorities Cited
- Keller Indus., Inc. v. Yoder, 625 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)