In the case Reuschel v. Reuschel, 1D20-1039 (Fla. 1st DCA May 14, 2021), the husband appealed an order he believed granted the wife’s motion to disqualify counsel. As part of the parties’ divorce, a law firm was hired by the husband to represent him individually and a dental practice which is a marital asset.
Full Answer
Additionally, the procedure and law applicable to disqualification of trial judges in federal cases will be briefly discussed. The procedure for filing disqualification motions for civil and criminal cases is set out in rule 2.160 of the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration.
A motion to disqualify must be in writing and “specifically allege the facts and reasons” relied on to show the basis for disqualification. See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.160 (c).
3 Rules 4-1.6, 4-1.7, and 4-1.9 of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar generally govern in attorney conflict of interest disqualification matters. Rule 4-1.6 provides that, except in limited circumstances, “a lawyer shall not reveal information relating to representation of a client. . . unless the client consents after disclosure to the client.”
The decision reversed a trial court’s order, which had been approved by the Fourth District Court of Appeal, refusing disqualification of plaintiffs’ attorneys in a personal injury action. 1
“In all courts of the U.S. the parties may plead and conduct their own cases personally or by counsel .” Spouses can represent each other, but only when they get sued together. When they're both defendants, one spouse can show up and the other won't be defaulted. Parents cannot, however, represent their minor children.
A lawyer related to another lawyer as parent, child, sibling, or spouse shall not represent a client in a representation directly adverse to a person who the lawyer knows is represented by the other lawyer except upon consent by the client after consultation regarding the relationship.
Technical Override of a Power of Attorney If the person that granted the POA is no longer legally competent to make their own decisions, the only way to override this POA is to petition the court to appoint the parties interested as adult guardians or conservators.
Although an attorney is not specifically prohibited from having an intimate relationship with a client, both Rule 3-120 and Section 6109.9 set forth that an attorney's representation should cease if, as a result of the sexual relationship, his or her services cannot be competently carried out.
Rule 4-8.4. Misconduct. Currentness. A lawyer shall not: (a) violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through.
Should a lawyer represent a family member? The answer to the first question is a qualified yes. Courts do not typically intervene in allowing a family litigant to choose their lawyer, just as they generally don't interfere with litigants who represent themselves.
If the agent is acting improperly, family members can file a petition in court challenging the agent. If the court finds the agent is not acting in the principal's best interest, the court can revoke the power of attorney and appoint a guardian.
Can a Power of Attorney change a will? It's always best to make sure you have a will in place – especially when appointing a Power of Attorney. Your attorney can change an existing will, but only if you're not 'of sound mind' and are incapable to do it yourself. As ever, these changes should be made in your interest.
You can either make it so that everyone has to agree to something before it can be done, or that anyone of you can make the decision. It's hard to decide which is best.
Female lawyers and judges are most likely to marry male lawyers and judges. Male lawyers and judges are most likely to marry female lawyers and judges.
For decades, regulators and courts have ruled that sex with a client during the course of the professional relationship is unethical. Nonetheless, lawyers continue to flout precedent and are frequently disciplined for engaging in sexual relations with their clients.
Both the California Rules of Professional Conduct and the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct prohibit lawyers and clients from engaging in “sexual relations” unless they predated the representation.
Lawyers are not allowed to represent you if they are your friend or have been associated with you as a couple during your marriage, or if they are a family member due to these conflict issues.
However, when practising law, lawyers can only provide legal assistance, advice, and counselling to their clients while an attorney can represent clients in court and initiate defendant prosecutions in addition to providing legal counsel and consultation.
Yes, you can appear on behalf of your father by entering into General Power Of Attorney. But it is advisable that any person who wishes to appear in the court is very well aware of the facts and circumstances of the case as in trial courts at the stage of giving evidence his part will be very crucial.
Therefore, it is good to learn and have knowledge that a non-lawyer can represent someone in court and a person can hire a non-lawyer to represent in court. However, whether they can go ahead with the proceedings is entirely dependent and at the discretion of the Hon'ble Court where the party's case has been filed.
2d 305, 307-308 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), that the ultimate purpose of the rules in such a situation is to afford parties the right to an impartial forum, and that when necessary, a trial court may grant disqualification because circumstances have arisen in which one party has an unfair advantage over the other. 24 The court then characterized the ultimate question, in light of the foregoing legal principles, as whether the insurers could “stand in the shoes” of the insured and be heard to raise the issue of disqualification. 25 Answering in the affirmative, Justice Grimes opined that the insurers clearly had such an interest, even though they were not parties to the litigation and were not “the former client of the involved attorneys,” and even though the former client had expressly consented to the potential conflict. 26 The court’s reasoning: The insurers were in fact interested parties because they would be require ( to indemnify the father for losses suffered, and, therefore, had a material interest in the outcome of the litigation. 27 Thus, the insurers had standing to move to disqualify the attorneys based upon considerations of the fair administration of justice. 28
First, the trial court felt that the insurers lacked standing to bring a motion to disqualify, since they were not former clients of the attorneys; and secondly, that the insurers had failed to show clearly and convincingly that they would be prejudiced or that the continued representation would interfere with the fair and impartial administration of justice. 17 The Fourth District Court of Appeal denied the insurers’ petitions for certiorari on the latter grounds. 18 The Supreme Court thereafter accepted the case for review based upon conflict jurisdiction. 19
2d 1185 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), the First District reversed an administrative hearing officer’s order denying a motion for disqualification which had been filed by an insurance agent, who was the subject of administrative proceedings to revoke his license. 32 It was undisputed that the agent had no prior attorney-client relationship with the attorney sought to be disqualified. The First District held nonetheless that the agent had standing to raise the issue of disqualification, noting that disqualification in the case was required to avoid the “appearance of impropriety.” 33
The lawyers said, in effect, that the insurers could not seek disqualification because the attorney-client relationship belonged solely to the former client. The former client had consented to the conflict which, they said, satisfied the rule’s requirements. 20
The father’s liability carriers, including State Farm, thereafter filed motions seeking to disqualify the law firm’s attorneys from representing the mother and daughter in the automobile action against the father. The trial court refused to disqualify the father’s prior attorneys on two grounds.
The facts giving rise to the State Farm decision are complex and are presented in detail in the court’s opinion, Essentially, a father, mother, and daughter were originally represented by the same lawyers in an automobile negligence action. 15 With the father’s express consent, the law firm withdrew as his counsel, but continued to represent the injured mother and daughter, and filed an amended complaint advancing a claim against the firm’s former client, the father. 16 The same law firm had also pursued a medical malpractice action on behalf of the parents and their daughter, relating to alleged negligent treatment of the daughter, and continued representing the entire family in that case after withdrawal from the other. The father’s liability carriers, including State Farm, thereafter filed motions seeking to disqualify the law firm’s attorneys from representing the mother and daughter in the automobile action against the father.
Thus, in situations when clear appearances of impropriety or unfairness could have a detrimental effect in that regard, the balance must be struck in favor of these overriding policy considerations, The court thus concluded as it had opened— by making it clear that substance will, in fact, be given priority over form in the analysis of attorney disqualification issues , and that technical defenses to disqualification will be rejected when it appears that the circumstances are such as would arguably erode public confidence in the fair administration of justice.
A woman filed a lawsuit against defendants seeking damages, and had her Florida lawyer representing her. The defendants sought to take the deposition of the woman’s trial attorney. In Florida, this is unusual. The Florida trial lawyer for a party to a Florida lawsuit is an advocate — typically not a fact witness . So the woman’s trial attorney did what most Florida lawyers do: filed a motion for a protective order, which was denied by the Broward County trial judge. The Florida trial lawyer testified at his deposition. Why did they want to depose the woman’s Florida trial lawyer? Evidently, the Florida lawyer and his case investigator spoke with an important witness, an employee of one of the defendants. The witness later gave a conflicting of account of the conversation with the trial lawyer and the investigator.
The Florida trial lawyer for a party to a Florida lawsuit is an advocate — typically not a fact witness . So the woman’s trial attorney did what most Florida lawyers do: filed a motion for a protective order, which was denied by the Broward County trial judge. The Florida trial lawyer testified at his deposition.
The Broward County judge disqualified the woman’s Florida trial counsel and she appealed to the Florida appeals court by seeking a writ of certiorari.
The Florida bar creates and enforces rules regulating the conduct of Florida lawyers. The rules regulating the Florida bar set forth ethical standards which Florida lawyers are required to follow. A lawyer shall not act as an advocate at trial in which the lawyer is likely to be a necessary witness on behalf of a client.
Disqualification of a Florida attorney is an extraordinary remedy which will only be resorted to sparingly — translation: your back’s up against the wall if you think they’re going to disqualify the other side’s trial attorney.
On the other side of that legal coin, however, Florida courts bend over backwards to provide fairness and objectivity . Florida courts are very mindful of conflicts of interest and that, at least admittedly, ...
You can see that a Florida beneficiary or a trustee or executor or estate administrator may, conceivably, need to disqualify a Florida lawyer from representing a party to a probate lawsuit — and also keep the Florida lawyer from testifying at a probate trial . In some cases, the Florida probate lawyer who dealt with the dead Florida resident may be ...
Assuming that the judge does not disqualify himself or herself sua sponte, counsel may consider filing a motion to disqualify or recuse the trial judge from further presiding in the action . This article will explain the procedure counsel must follow when filing such a disqualification motion, review the requirements imposed upon trial judges when determining disqualification motions, and examine the case law addressing the legal sufficiency of disqualification motions. Additionally, the procedure and law applicable to disqualification of trial judges in federal cases will be briefly discussed.
A related principle mitigating against disqualification is that a judge is not required to abstain from forming mental impressions and opinions during the course of judicial proceedings. For instance, in Mobil v. Trask, 463 So. 2d 389 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), a deputy commissioner’s remark to an employer/carrier’s attorney at a workers’ compensation hearing that “I don’t see how you can’t find this accident compensable,” which comment related directly to the merits of the petitioner’s case, was nonetheless held to be insufficient to justify the granting of a recusal motion. And, in Brown v. Pate, 577 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), the First District held that in a dependency adjudication of minor children following a father’s acquittal in the prosecution for the mother’s murder, the trial judge’s expression of “grave concern” regarding the father’s visitation did not serve as a basis for judicial disqualification. Citing the rationale of the Mobil case, the court opined that, “A judge may form mental impressions and opinions during the course of presentation of evidence so long as she does not prejudge the case.” Pate, 577 So. 2d at 647. 24 It has been said that a judge is the “sum of his past” who is expected to be influenced by real life experiences. 25
Rule 2.160 (d) sets forth the following bases for a disqualification motion, at least one of which must be shown in the motion: 1. that the party fears that he or she will not receive a fair trial or hearing because of specifically described prejudice or bias of the judge;
Initial and Successive Disqualification Motions. If an initial disqualification motion alleges a fear of prejudice or bias under rule 2.160 (d) (1), the trial judge is required to determine only the “legal sufficiency” of the motion and is prohibited from passing on the truth of the facts averred.
An important requirement contained in rule 2.160 (e) is that a disqualification motion must be made within 10 days after the “discovery of the facts constituting the grounds” for the motion.
2. that the judge before whom the case is pending, or some person related to said judge by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree, is a party thereto or is interested in the result thereof; 3. that the judge is related to an attorney or counselor of record in the cause by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree; or.
This is accomplished by the filing of a motion for reconsideration within 20 days of the order of disqualification. Id.