RACHEL BERRY, PETITIONER,
v.
BRETT BERRY, RESPONDENT
While we ascribe absolutely no improper motive to the trial judge’s actions, we find that the ex parte conference was not authorized under the terms of Canon 3B(7) of the Code of Judicial Conduct, and the husband has failed to identify any other applicable exception to the general rule that a judge shall not permit or consider ex parte communications concerning a pending proceeding. We further conclude that the fact that this ex parte conference occurred constituted a legally sufficient basis for petitioner’s motion for disqualification. See generally Rose v. State, 601 So.2d 1181 (Fla.1992). Accordingly, the petition for writ of prohibition is granted. On remand, a new judge shall be assigned to hear further proceedings in this matter.
WOLF, PADOVANO, and RAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Berry v. Bret M. Berry, 151 So. 3d 1293 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)…d former wife’s petition for writ of prohibition upon finding that an ex parte conference held by the judge during the hearing on former wife’s motion to vacate constituted a legally sufficient basis for the judge’s disqualification. Berry v. Berry, 139 So. 3d 508 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014). The court remanded with instructions that a new judge be assigned to hear further proceedings in this matter. Id. Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.330(h) provides that “[pjrior factual- or legal rulings by a disqualifie…
Authorities Cited
- Rose v. State, 601 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 1992)