Trial court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing plaintiff's case due to fraud on court  [Added 1/28/08]

    Plaintiff sued Defendants alleging that he was injured due to their negligence.  Plaintiff alleged that the incident caused severe headaches, a neck injury, and temporomandibular joint (TMJ) problems.  In his interrogatory answers Plaintiff disclosed that he had suffered a previous back injury for which he had received a settlement.  He listed the name of his treating physician.

    During Plaintiff's deposition he testified that he never had a prior neck injury or headaches.  Defendants obtained the medical records from Plaintiff's former treating physician, which Defendants asserted showed extensive treatment over an 8-year period for head and neck pain.  The trial court granted a motion to dismiss Plaintiff's case for fraud on the court.  Plaintiff appealed.

    The Second DCA affirmed.  Citing Morgan v. Campbell, 816 So.2d 251, 253 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), the appellate court noted that Plaintiff's misrepresentations concerning his previous medical treatment were "directly related to the central issue in the case."  In the instant case, "the record unequivocally supports the trial court's determination that [Plaintiff] provided intentionally false deposition testimony and interrogatory answers.  [Plaintiff] was given a full opportunity at the evidentiary hearing to explain the discrepancies between his sworn responses in discovery and the pertinent medical records.  The trial court rejected the explanation offered by [Plaintiff] and concluded that [Plaintiff]'s statements in discovery concerning his prior medical treatment were 'clearly . . . lie[s], which lie[s] [were] stated under oath on numerous occasions.'  There is nothing ambiguous about the circumstances presented here:  [Plaintiff]'s dishonesty was blatant.  And his dishonesty went right to the heart of the case.  In such circumstances, 'the need to maintain [the] institutional integrity [of the judicial system] and the desirability of deterring future misconduct' strongly support resort to the severe sanction of dismissal.  Aoude [v. Mobil Oil Corp.] , 892 F. 2d [1115 (1st Cir. 1989)] at 1118."  Ramey v. Haverty Furniture Companies, Inc., ___ So.2d ___ (Fla. 2d DCA, No. 2D07-567, 1/18/2008), 2008 WL 160970.

Ethically permissible for judge, at parties' request, to recommend mediator in adversarial probate proceeding  [1/24/08]

    Judge sits in the probate division.  Judge asked the Florida Supreme Court's Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee "whether in an adversarial probate case, when both sides are present in open court, and ask the Judge for a recommendation of a mediator, the Judge can make recommendations."

    The Committee answered in the affirmative.  "Judges are not to use their public office to promote the private interests of others.  Accordingly, if both sides request the Judge to recommend a mediator, the Judge may proceed to do so but with great caution.  The Committee suggests that the Judge recommend at least three persons and not reflect any preference.  If the Judge is asked on more than one occasion by both sides of a contested matter for a recommendation, the Judge should be careful not to repeatedly recommend the same mediator(s)."  Judicial Ethics Advisory Opinion 2008-1 (January 8, 2008).

Defendant's sentences reversed because they were imposed by judge other than judge who accepted plea, where it was not shown that substitution of judges was "necessary."  [Added 12/20/07]  --  Kramer v. State, 970 So.2d 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).  See also Ingram v. State, 977 So.2d 605 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (error for successor judge to impose sentence absent necessity or emergency; "[m]ere convenience cannot justify sentencing by a substitute judge").

Criminal conviction reversed because trial court did not grant continuance after granting defendant's motion to discharge appointed counsel.  [Added 9/5/07]  --  Sessions v. State, 965 So.2d 194 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).

court did not abuse discretion in dismissing action with prejudice based on determination that plaintiff repeatedly gave material false testimony.  [Added 8/24/07]  --  Jesse v. Commercial Diving Academy of Jacksonville, Inc., 963 So.2d 308 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007).

Criminal conviction reversed because trial judge dismissed juror who asked a lot of questions.  [Added 5/3/07]  --   Washington v. State, 955 So.2d 1165 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007).

Unethical for drug court judge to seek or accept from lawyers or law firms donations of "incentive gifts" to be given to defendants as rewards.  [Added 3/23/07]  --  Judicial Ethics Advisory Opinion 2007-05.

Court did not err in denying criminal defense lawyer's motions to withdraw.  Fondura v. State, 940 So.2d 489 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006).

Court erred in awarding F.S. 57.105 fees and sanctions against lawyer for conduct occurring before determinative legal issue had been decided in that District.  Global Heir and Asset Locators, Inc. v. First NLC Financial Services, LLC, 936 So.2d 1216 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).  NOTE:  The court did not comment on any lawyer advertising questions that might relate to Asset Locator's relationship with and regular recommendation of Lawyer.  (See, e.g., Florida Ethics Opinion 97-3.) 

Judge may not accept litigants' offer to reimburse expenses incurred by judge in presiding over depositions in another country.  Judicial Ethics Advisory Opinion 2006-22.

Court abused discretion by limiting criminal defense counsel's closing argument to 20 minutes in sexual battery case.  Curry v. State, 930 So.2d 849 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).

Court's failure to grant continuances earns reversal of judgments.  Second DCA.  M.F. v. State, 920 So.2d 1252 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (juvenile case); Fifth DCA.  Myers v. Siegel, 920 So.2d 1241 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (civil case).

Counsel's appearance in criminal trial takes precedence over civil case per rule;  court erred in proceeding with civil case in counsel's absence.  Garmon v. Garmon, 920 So.2d 209 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

Judge acted within discretion in denying continuance due to counsel's conduct, be erred in striking party's only 2 witnesses.  Taylor v. Mazda Motor of America, Inc., 934 So.2d 518 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005).

Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee opines on judge's ethical duties when lawyer, notary, and client are involved in possible perjury.  Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee Opinion 2005-16.

Not error for court to sign proposed judgment exactly as submitted 2 weeks prior, where both parties had chance to submit proposals.  DeMello v. Buckman, 914 So.2d 1090 (Fla. 4^th DCA 2005).  NOTE:  See also Bryan v. Bryan, 930 So.2d 693 (Fla.3d DCA 2006) (trial court's failure to make oral findings of fact or conclusions of law at final hearing, where both parties submitted proposed final judgments and had opportunity to respond; no appearance that trial court did not exercise its independent professional judgment).

Trial court's expression of frustration, rebuke of counsel, and comments on evidence warrant reversal in civil case.  Vaughn v. Progressive Casualty Ins. Co., 907 So.2d 1248 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005).

Judge's imposition of harsher sentence than offered in plea discussion does not, of itself, equate to "vindictiveness."  Jamerson v. State, 888 So.2d 49 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004).

Court must specifically find "willful noncompliance" with court order before dismissing complaint with prejudice as discovery sanction.  Kinney v. R.H. Halt Associates, Inc., 884 So.2d 400 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004).

Not permitting defendant to confer with counsel during short recess violated right to counsel under Florida Constitution, but was harmless error.  Leerdam v. State, 891 So.2d 1046 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004).

Judges did not abuse discretion by denying continuances in criminal trials.  Lawson v. State, 884 So.2d 540 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004); Savage v. State, 880 So.2d 809 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004).

Repeated interruptions by trial judge during cross-examination and closing argument warrant reversal of criminal conviction.  Barnes v. State, 875 So.2d 789 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004).

Trial court's adoption of party's proposed judgment verbatim without making required findings on remand requires reversal.  Walker v. Walker, 873 So.2d 565 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004).  NOTE:  See also Carlton v. Carlton, 888 So.2d 121 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (no indication that trial court considered issues prior to entering final judgment where judge signed verbatim version of order submitted by one party, and other party had no opportunity to object to proposed order prior to its verbatim adoption by court; "Perlow [v. Berg-Perlow, 875 So.2d 383 (Fla. 2004)] specifically condemned this practice").

Dismissal with prejudice as discovery sanction reversed due to lack of specific findings, including no finding of at least partial client fault.  Bank One, N.A. v. Harrod, 873 So.2d 519 (Fla. 4^th DCA 2004).  NOTE:  The Second and Fifth DCA recently reached similar conclusions regarding the necessity of client involvement in the disobedience in order to support a dismissal of the case.  See Jimenez v. Simon, 879 So.2d 13 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); American Express v. Hickey, 869 So.2d 694 (Fla. 5^th DCA 2004).

Limited jurisdiction of JCCs does not include authority to sanction lawyers for violating Rules of Professional Conduct.  Pace v. Miami-Dade County School Board, 868 So.2d 1286 (Fla. 1^st DCA 2004).

Without announcing findings or conclusions on record, trial court erred by accepting proposed final judgment from one spouse in dissolution case and almost immediately signing it verbatim.  Perlow v. Berg-Perlow, 875 So.2d 383 (Fla. 2004) (revised opinion).

Trial court's dismissal of complaint with prejudice as discovery violation sanction affirmed.  Ham v. Dunmire, 855 So.2d 1238 (Fla. 1^st DCA 2003).