WILLIAM J. ROMANOS, JR., M.D. AND WILLIAM J. ROMANOS, JR., M.D., P.A., PETITIONERS,
v.
REBECCA B. CALDWELL AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF R. MICHAEL CALDWELL, DECEASED, RESPONDENT
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 court held that the trial court's order preventing the deposition of opposing counsel, absent a waiver of disqualification, did not constitute a departure from the essential requirements of law warranting certiorari.
A psychiatrist, sued for medical malpractice after a patient's suicide, sought to depose the patient's widow's attorney, who had a personal relationsh…
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 Disqualification Of Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner, defendant in a medical malpractice action below, seeks a writ of certiorari to quash a trial court order that prevented petitioner from deposing opposing counsel, Christian Searcy. In the ac tion below, a patient’s widow is suing the petitioner, a psychiatrist, for alleged negligence in his treatment of her husband who committed suicide some time after the psychiatrist had prescribed the decedent antidepressant medication.
Searcy had known the decedent for a number of years and had played golf with the decedent three days before he took his own life. The wife, who is suing in her capacity as the personal representative of her husband’s estate, wants Searcy to represent her at trial. The trial court refused to permit the psychiatrist to depose Searcy unless the doctor agreed to waive any potential disqualification of Searcy from serving as wife’s counsel.
We find no departure from the essential requirements of law that warrants this court’s exercise of its extraordinary writ jurisdiction. See Power Plant Entertainment, LLC v. Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Dev. Co., LLC, 958 So. 2d 565 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). Our announcement in Power Plant was not an invitation for litigants to seek review of all orders denying discovery. The review contemplated by Power Plant is reserved for extraordinary and highly unusual situations where the trial court’s order constitutes a serious departure from the essential requirements of law that cannot be remedied on direct appeal. While we have no “hard and fast” rule against such review, this case does not present the exceptional circumstances we envisioned in Power Plant, nor those considered by the fifth district in Beekie v. Morgan, 751 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). The petition is dismissed.
STONE, POLEN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Charneco v. Gayda, 72 So. 3d 199 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)…essential requirements of law, I see no reason why the harm that will result from the order cannot be corrected on plenary appeal. The order fails to meet the requirements for certiorari review of an order denying discovery. See Romanos v. Caldwell, 980 So. 2d 1091, 1092 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). (observing that certiorari review of orders denying discovery “is reserved for extraordinary and highly unusual situations where the trial court’s order constitutes a serious departure from the essential requirements of la…
-
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Nicolette Strachan, 82 So. 3d 1052 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)…ement amounts are no longer relevant. [*1054] The denial of discovery is generally not renewable by certiorari. Power Plant Entm’t, LLC v. Tramp Hotels & Casino Resorts Dev. Co., 958 So. 2d 565, 567 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007); see also Romanos v. Caldwell, 980 So. 2d 1091, 1092 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). In this petition, however, Wal-Mart asserts that certiorari is the appropriate remedy because it will suffer material irreparable harm without any alternative evidence to prove its entitlement to a set-off at trial. Wal-Ma…
-
Preudhomme v. Garth Bailey, 186 So. 3d 1083 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)…upon Former Wife’s Motion to Compel Accurate, Complete. Responses to Her Supple-. [*1084] mental Request to Produce. This court lacks jurisdiction to review the order. See Goslin v. Preisser, 148 So. 3d 869 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); Romanos v. Caldwell, 980 So. 2d 1091 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). Affirmed in part and dismissed in part. WARNER, GROSS and LEVINE, JJ., concur. . Effective January 1, 2015, rule 9.020(i)(3) was amended to provide that "the appeal shall be held in abeyance until the filing of a signed, writ…
Authorities Cited
- Herman v. Herman, 751 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
- Power Plant Ent., LLC v. Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Dev. Co., LLC, 958 So. 2d 565 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)