JAMES L. ROBISON
v.
CITIBANK, N. A.
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 motion to disqualify a trial judge is not properly reviewed on direct appeal; prohibition is the proper avenue for such immediate review.
[1] A motion to disqualify a trial judge must be reviewed by petition for prohibition rather than on direct appeal to a district court of appeal.
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“Prohibition is . . . recognized as the proper avenue for immediate review of whether a motion to disqualify a trial judge has been correctly denied.”
Court citing Sutton v. State, 975 So. 2d 1073, 1076 (Fla. 2008) to establish the correct procedure for challenging a trial judge disqualification denial.
James L. Robison appealed a trial court decision, including a July 12, 2022 denial of his motion to disqualify the trial judge in a matter involving C…
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 Prohibition cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In these consolidated appeals, we dismiss for lack of jurisdiction
the portion of the appeal in case number 2D22-2591 challenging the trial
court's July 12, 2022, denial of James L. Robison's motion to disqualify
the trial judge. See Sutton v. State, 975 So. 2d 1073, 1076 (Fla. 2008)
2
("[P]rohibition is . . . recognized as the proper avenue for immediate
review of whether a motion to disqualify a trial judge has been correctly
denied."). We find no merit to the remaining issues Robison has raised
on appeal and otherwise affirm without comment.
Affirmed in part and dismissed in part.
SLEET, C.J., and KELLY and VILLANTI, JJ., Concur.
Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.