DIAMOND R. FERTILIZER AND SEIBELS BRUCE GROUP, PETITIONERS,
v.
CHARLES C. HURT, ETC., ET AL., RESPONDENTS

Fla. 1st DCA | 1991-07-03
No. 91-1403
Shivers, C.J., Wigginton, J., Nimmons, J.
582 So. 2d 137 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1991)

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.

Synopsis

Court granted petition for writ of prohibition, requiring the Judge of Compensation Claims to disqualify himself because the motion for disqualification was timely and the facts alleged would place a reasonably prudent person in fear of not receiving a fair and impartial trial.


Holding

A Judge of Compensation Claims must disqualify himself when a timely motion for disqualification demonstrates facts that would place a reasonably prudent person in fear of not receiving a fair and impartial trial.


Headnotes

[1] A judge must disqualify himself when a timely motion for disqualification alleges facts that would place a reasonably prudent person in fear of not receiving a fair and i…

[2] A judge impermissibly passes on the merits of a disqualification motion by proceeding with further proceedings without expressly ruling on the motion.

Previewing 2 of 2 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

Facts & Procedural History

Diamond R. Fertilizer and Seibels Bruce Group filed a motion for disqualification of the Judge of Compensation Claims in a workers' compensation proce…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Diamond R. Fertilizer and Seibels Bruce Group, the employer and carrier in the proceedings below, petition this court for a writ of prohibition. They contend that the respondent Judge of Compensation Claims should have granted their motion for disqualification. Although the JCC did not expressly rule on the motion, he commenced further proceedings after it was filed and considered, action which he obviously should not have taken if he found the motion to be well-taken.

Having carefully considered the petition, the response, and the reply, we find that the motion for disqualification was timely and that movants demonstrated that the facts set forth would place a reasonably prudent person in fear of not receiving a fair and impartial trial. MacKenzie v. Super Kids Bargain Store, Inc., 565 So. 2d 1332, 1335 (Fla.1990). We also find that at the hearing on the motion the JCC imper-missibly passed on the truth or falsity of the facts alleged by movant. Bundy v. Rudd, 366 So. 2d 440 (Fla.1978).

Upon consideration of the foregoing, we grant the petition and direct the respondent Judge of Compensation Claims to enter an order in which he disqualifies himself from presiding over any further proceedings with respect to the claim of respondent Davis against the petitioners.

PETITION GRANTED.

SHIVERS, C.J., and WIGGINTON and NIMMONS, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw