Pimienta v. Rosenfeld
3d DCA, 4/3/24
No. 3D23-0858, 2024 WL 1424059
Per Curiam
Topics: Disqualification/Recusal of Judge; Writ of Prohibition
The Third District Court of Appeal granted a petition for a writ of certiorari quashing a trial judge’s order denying a party’s motion to disqualify the judge. The motion to disqualify was legally sufficient because it alleged that the trial court refused to allow the presence of a court reporter. The court insisted on hearing a motion “off the record.” On an initial motion to disqualify, allegations in the motion have to be accepted as true, and the court can only rule that the motion is legally sufficient or insufficient. There can be no factfinding about whether the facts are true or false. The opinion does not specify whether the judge found the motion legally insufficient or found that the facts in the motion were untrue, but either way, once a basis for disqualification has been established, if a judge denies the motion to disqualify, a writ of prohibition is the appropriate and necessary remedy.” GRANTED.
