Case ID: so3d_254/html/0419-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

J.T., The Father, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, et al., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2800
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    JANUARY 02, 2018
    J.T., Father of the Minor Child, seeks by way of a petition for writ of mandamus review of the trial court's denial of Petitioner's motion for disqualification of the trial judge. We treat this as a petition for writ of prohibition.
    Although we have concluded that the grounds alleged in Petitioner's motion for disqualification are legally insufficient, "[w]hen a judge has looked beyond the mere legal sufficiency of a suggestion of prejudice and attempted to refute the charges of partiality, he has then exceeded the proper scope of his inquiry and on that basis alone established grounds for his disqualification." MacKenzie v. Super Kids Bargain Store, 565 So.2d 1332, 1339 (Fla. 1990) (citation omitted). Because the trial judge, in the order denying disqualification, has done so, we must grant the writ of prohibition. See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(f) ("If any motion is legally insufficient, an order denying the motion shall immediately be entered. No other reason for denial shall be stated, and an order of denial shall not take issue with the motion.").
    We withhold formal issuance of the writ, confident that the trial judge will promptly issue an order of disqualification.
    FERNANDEZ, LOGUE and LINDSEY, JJ.