GORDON PHELPS KELLEY, III, PETITIONER,
v.
JOANNA KELLEY, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE; JOANNA KELLEY AND NORTHERN TRUST BANK OF FLORIDA, N.A., AS CO-TRUSTEES OF THE MARITAL TRUST CREATED UNDER THE 2008 WILL; BANK OF NEW YORK, CAMILLE WEISS AND ERRET VAN NICE, AS CO-TRUSTEES OF THE GORDON P. KELLEY, JR. AGREEMENT; NORTHERN TRUST COMPANY, CAMILLE WEISS AND ERRET VAN NICE, AS CO-TRUSTEES OF THE HORTENSE HENRY PROSSER AGREEMENT; AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE U.S.A., INC., COUSTEAU SOCIETY; WORLD WILDLIFE FUND; AND THE CLASS OF PERSONS REFERENCED AS "LIVING GREAT-NIECES AND GREAT-NEPHEWS" OF THE DECEDENT, 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.
The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal granted a petition for writ of certiorari challenging a trial court's denial of a pro hac vice motion for a Louisiana attorney to appear in estate litigation. The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by imposing a requirement not found in the rules—that the foreign attorney demonstrate a special background suited to the case—when the attorney met all statutory requirements.
The trial court abused its discretion in denying the pro hac vice motion because the attorney met all requirements of the applicable rule and case law does not require the attorney to demonstrate a special background suited to the particular litigation. The court granted the petition and quashed the denial order.
[1] A foreign attorney seeking pro hac vice admission must file a verified motion demonstrating membership in good standing of the bar of another state, qualification under t…
[2] A court's discretion to deny a pro hac vice motion is not unlimited and must be based on matters appearing of record that cast doubt on the applicant's qualifications or…
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“Although the trial court has discretion in determining whether to grant pro hac vice status, that discretion is not unlimited or absolute.”
Establishes that while courts have discretion over pro hac vice motions, this discretion is constrained by law and rule requirements.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA Louisiana attorney sought to appear pro hac vice in Florida estate litigation involving the Kelley estate. The attorney filed a verified motion prov…
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 Appearance cases and more on FLexlaw
Petitioner challenges an order that denied his Louisiana attorney’s motion to appear pro hac vice in the underlying litigation. Because the motion was sufficient, and there were no legally sufficient reasons to deny the motion, we grant the petition for writ of certiorari.
Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.510(a) provides that a foreign attorney must file a verified motion to appear as counsel showing that he or she is a member in good standing of the bar of another state. The court may grant permission if the motion provides all of the information required by rule 2.510(b), if the foreign attorney is qualified under the rule, and if the foreign attorney has associated local counsel who is a member of The Florida Bar. The motion in this case provided all the necessary information, and the foreign attorney met all the qualifications.
Irreparable harm in denying the motion is two-fold. First, a party is deprived of counsel of choice. Info. Sys. Assocs., Inc. v. Phuture World, Inc., 106 So.3d 982, 984 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013). Second, the denial or revocation of counsel’s admission has future adverse consequences on the attorney. Id.; see also Brooks v. AMP Servs. Ltd., 979 So.2d 435, 437-38 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).
The trial court’s view that the attorney needed to show a “special background,” suitable to the type of litigation in which the attorney appears, departs from the essential requirements of law. Neither the rule nor case law requires such a showing.
Although the trial court has discretion in determining whether to grant pro hac vice status, that discretion is not unlimited or absolute. See Brooks, 979 So.2d at 439. “[T]he ruling should be based on matters that appear of record before the court.” THI Holdings, LLC v. Shattuck, 93 So.3d 419, 423 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (quoting Huff v. State, 569 So.2d 1247, 1249-50 (Fla. 1990)). “For example, something which easts doubt upon whether the applicant is actually a member of the bar of another jurisdiction or whether ... the applicant is a member in good standing [within his designated jurisdiction] may support a denial of the motion.” Id. (quoting Huff, 569 So.2d at 1250) (emphasis omitted). None of those reasons are apparent in this record.
Consequently, we grant the petition and quash the order that denied the motion to appear pro hac vice.
Petition granted.
WARNER, STEVENSON and MAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Begonja v. Wyndham Vacation Resorts, Inc., 374 So. 3d 887 (Fla. 6th DCA 2023)…ce.” Brooks v. AMP Servs., Ltd., 979 So. 2d 435, 437 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). Because such orders potentially deprive a party of counsel of choice and create “future adverse consequences on the attorney,” they cause irreparable harm. Kelley v. Kelley, 123 So. 3d 692, 693 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013); accord THI Holdings v. Shattuck, 93 So. 3d 419, 422 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). “Moreover, because the attorney is barred from further involvement, he has no remedy on appeal.” Info. Sys. Assocs. v. Phuture World, 106 So. 3d 982,…
-
Begonja v. Wyndham Vacation Resorts, Inc. (Fla. 5th DCA 2023)
Authorities Cited
- Huff v. State, 569 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 1990)
- 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)
- Barrett v. State, 93 So. 3d 419 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)
- Info. Sys. Assocs., Inc. v. Phuture World, Inc., 106 So. 3d 982 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)