MICHAEL DUCOTE
v.
RIACHO, LLC, ETC.
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.
A certiorari petition challenging a trial court's order overruling objections to a discovery subpoena is dismissed as moot when the trial court subsequently enters a protective order addressing the petitioners' privilege concerns.
[1] A petition for certiorari review may be dismissed as moot when a subsequent trial court order resolves the issues raised in the petition.
[2] A trial court order requiring the preparation of a privilege log and an in camera review of disputed documents may render a prior order overruling objections to a discove…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePetitioners objected to a discovery subpoena directed to their former law firm, Adams & Reese, LLP, which also served as escrow agent in a real estate…
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 Privilege Log cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed May 12, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D21-524 Lower Tribunal No. 20-9219
________________
Michael Ducote, et al.,
Petitioners,
vs.
Riacho, LLC, etc.,
Respondent.
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Lourdes Simon, Judge. Kula & Associates, P.A., and Elliot B. Kula and W. Aaron Daniel and William D. Mueller, for petitioners. De La Peña Group, P.A., and Leoncio E. de la Peña D., Otto C. de Córdoba and Tracy Pérez, for respondent. Before SCALES, LOBREE and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM.
Petitioners Michael Ducote and Gulflet Properties, LLC seek certiorari review of a February 1, 2021 trial court order that overruled Petitioners’ objections to a non-party discovery subpoena. The subpoena was directed toward Petitioners’ former law firm, Adams & Reese, LLP (the “Law Firm”),
which also served as the escrow agent for a real estate transaction.
After entry of both the challenged order and Petitioners’ February 15,
2021 filing of the instant petition, the discovery subpoena was served on the
Law Firm, and the Law Firm filed its own motion for protective order objecting to the subpoena. Just as Petitioners had argued in their objections, the Law
Firm’s motion asserted that several of the sought documents were privileged.
On March 11, 2021, the trial court conducted a hearing on the Law
Firm’s objections and entered a March 12, 2021 order that grants in part the
Law Firm’s motion for protective order (the “March 12th Order”). In relevant part, the March 12th Order requires Petitioners to review the sought documents with the Law Firm and prepare a privilege log pursuant to Florida
Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(6). The March 12th Order also requires
Petitioners to produce to respondent Riacho, LLC all documents for which no privilege is claimed. As to the documents for which a privilege is claimed,
the March 12th Order provides that the trial court will conduct “an evidentiary hearing and conduct an in camera review where necessary, prior to production of such documents.”
Neither party has challenged the March 12th Order, which appears to assuage the concerns raised in Petitioners’ petition. We therefore exercise our discretion not to reach the merits of the petition and, instead, dismiss the petition as having been mooted by the trial court’s entry of the March 12th
Order.
Petition dismissed as moot.