THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY OF CALIFORNIA, INC., AND MARY SUE HUHBARD, APPELLANTS,
v.
GABRIEL CAZARES AND MARGARET CAZARES, HIS WIFE, APPELLEES
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.
The Church of Scientology and Mary Sue Hubbard appealed a partial denial of their venue change motion in a civil suit in Pinellas County. The appellate court held that once a trial court determines venue should be changed, it must fully transfer jurisdiction to another county court and cannot retain partial jurisdiction, and must also require the moving parties to pay accrued costs.
Once a trial court determines that venue should be changed, it must enter an order fully transferring the action to a court of competent jurisdiction in another county under section 47.141, Florida Statutes. The court cannot retain partial jurisdiction in the original county. Additionally, the moving parties must pay accrued costs as required by section 47.191, Florida Statutes.
[1] A motion for change of venue may be granted if a fair trial cannot be obtained in the county where the action is pending.
[2] A court may transfer a case to another county for trial but cannot retain jurisdiction after ordering a venue change.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Once the court determined this, it had to enter an order transferring the action to a court of the same jurisdiction in another county.”
Establishes that once venue change is warranted, the trial court must fully transfer jurisdiction, not retain partial control
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGabriel and Margaret Cazares sued The Church of Scientology of California, Inc. and Mary Sue Hubbard (wife of the Church's founder) in circuit court i…
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 Jurisdiction Transfer cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHEB, Chief Judge.
Gabriel and Margaret Cazares sued The Church of Scientology of California, Inc., and Mary Sue Hubbard in circuit court in Pinellas County. The Church and Hubbard each moved for a change of venue under section 47.101(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1979), on the ground that they could not receive a fair trial in Pinellas County because The Church was odious to the inhabitants of Pinellas County and the people associated Hubbard with The Church because she was the wife of its founder. Following a hearing the trial court entered its order stating:
[T]hat the Motions for Change of Venue are denied to the limited extent that they seek a recusal of the Court and assignment of the case to another Judge in another Circuit, however,
It is further ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion is granted in part to the extent that the trial of the cause shall be held in Daytona Beach, Volusia County, Florida.
It is further ORDERED that F.S. 47.-191 shall not be applied to require the movants, MARY SUE HUBBARD and THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY OF CALIFORNIA INC. to pay taxable costs at this time since the cause has not been transferred away from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County, Florida and that jurisdiction still lies in that Court.
While the court denied The Church and Hubbard’s motions to the extent that they sought recusal, the order indicates that the court concluded that the cause should be transferred. Once the court determined this, it had to enter an order transferring the action to a court of the same jurisdiction in another county. § 47.141, Fla.Stat. (1979). The court’s authority at that point was limited to entry of an order transferring jurisdiction. Kern v. Kern, 309 So. 2d 563 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975); University Federal Savings and Loan Association of Coral Gables v. Lightbourn, 201 So. 2d 568 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967). Further, the court having improperly attempted to retain jurisdiction, it also erred in not requiring The Church and Hubbard, as movants, to pay accrued costs. § 47.191, Fla.Stat. (1979).
Accordingly, we vacate the court’s order, remand, and direct the trial court to enter an order transferring venue in accordance with section 47.141 and directing payment of costs as required by section 47.191.
HOBSON and DANAHY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hubbard v. Cazares, 413 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)…e of that jurisdiction. In our view, a motion for change of venue goes beyond a defense on the merits. AFFIRMED. SCHEB, C. J., concurs with DANAHY, J. HOBSON, J., dissents with opinion. . The Church of Scientology of California, Inc. v. Cazares, 401 So. 2d 810 (Fla. 2d DC A 1981). . A similar observation is made in Berard Construction Co., Inc. v. Municipal Court of the Los Angeles Judicial District, 49 Cal.App.3d 710, 122 Cal.Rptr. 825 (Ct.App.1975). In that case the court noted that California’s statut…
-
Davis v. Fla. Power Corp., 486 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)…of Appeal, the appellate district which serves Citrus County. We disagree. Upon a change of venue the trans-feror court generally loses the power to rule upon other matters pending in the case. Church of Scientology of California, Inc. v. Cazares, 401 So. 2d 810 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). The transferee court becomes vested with jurisdiction over the cause as full and complete as if the action had been originally commenced in that court. University Federal Savings & Loan Association v. Lightbourn, 201 So. 2d 568 (…
-
State v. Erber, 560 So. 2d 1255 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)…e no reason the rule should be different in criminal cases. See, e.g., Davis v. Florida Power Corp., 486 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Raymond, James & Associates, Inc. v. Wieneke, 479 So. 2d 752 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Church of Scientology v. Cazares, 401 So. 2d 810 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). .See Swepson v. Call, 13 Fla. 337 (1869). . Neither party cites to Card v. State, 497 So. 2d 1169 (Fla.1986) or argues that, in entering the appealed order of dismissal, Judge Yawn might have been acting as a de facto circuit j…
Authorities Cited
- Univ. Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n OF Coral Gables v. Lightbourn, 201 So. 2d 568 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967)
- Kern v. Kern, 309 So. 2d 563 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)