Case Title: In Re: Certification of Need for Additional Judges

Citation: 

Docket Number: SC18-1970

State: florida

Court: Florida Supreme Court

Date: 2018-12-28T00:00:00Z

Document:
Supreme Court of Florida 
 
 
______________ 
 
No. SC18-1970 
______________ 
 
 
IN RE:  CERTIFICATION OF NEED 
FOR ADDITIONAL JUDGES. 
 
December 28, 2018 
 
PER CURIAM. 
This opinion fulfills our constitutional obligation to determine the State’s 
need for additional judges in fiscal year 2019/2020 and to certify our “findings and 
recommendations concerning such need” to the Legislature.1  Certification is “the 
sole mechanism established by our constitution for a systematic and uniform 
                                          
 
 
1.  Article V, section 9 of the Florida Constitution provides in pertinent part: 
 
Determination of number of judges. —The supreme court 
shall establish by rule uniform criteria for the determination of the 
need for additional judges except supreme court justices, the necessity 
for decreasing the number of judges and for increasing, decreasing or 
redefining appellate districts and judicial circuits.  If the supreme 
court finds that a need exists for increasing or decreasing the number 
of judges or increasing, decreasing or redefining appellate districts 
and judicial circuits, it shall, prior to the next regular session of the 
legislature, certify to the legislature its findings and recommendations 
concerning such need. 
 
- 2 - 
assessment of this need.”  In re Certification of Need for Additional Judges, 889 
So. 2d 734, 735 (Fla. 2004). 
In this opinion, we certify the need for two additional circuit court 
judgeships in the Ninth Judicial Circuit, one additional circuit court judgeship in 
the First Judicial Circuit, one additional circuit court judgeship in the Fourteenth 
Judicial Circuit, four additional county court judgeships in Hillsborough County, 
and no additional judgeships in the district courts of appeal.  We decertify the need 
for two county court judgeships in Brevard County and one county court judgeship 
in Pasco County. 
To make this decision, the Florida Supreme Court continues to use a verified 
objective weighted caseload methodology as a primary basis for assessing judicial 
need.2  The objective data are supplemented by judgeship requests submitted by 
the lower courts, including various secondary factors.  These secondary factors 
identified by each chief judge reflect local differences in support of their requests 
for more judgeships or in support of their requests to not decertify judgeships in 
situations where the objective case weights alone would indicate excess judicial 
capacity.  Applying the criteria in this two-step methodology, this Court concludes 
that the First, Ninth, and Fourteenth circuits have a demonstrable need for 
                                          
 
 
2.  Our certification methodology relies primarily on case weights and 
calculations of available judge time to determine the need for additional trial court 
judges.  See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.240. 
 
- 3 - 
additional circuit judges.  Using the same criteria, this Court has concluded that the 
secondary factor analysis and uncertainty that are further explained below warrant 
fewer decertifications than the raw numbers alone would indicate. 
A number of issues require additional study, review, and consideration 
because they impact our ability to accurately project judicial need.  First is the 
potential impact of a jurisdiction change in county court.  In view of the attention 
given during the 2018 legislative session to the issue of county court jurisdiction, 
this Court issued In re Work Group on County Court Jurisdiction, Fla. Admin. 
Order No. AOSC18-39 (Aug. 1, 2018), establishing the Work Group on County 
Court Jurisdiction within the Judicial Management Council.  We directed that work 
group to review the county court and small claims jurisdictional limits, which have 
not been adjusted since 1992 and 1996 respectively, and we instructed the work 
group to further consider and examine operational and workload issues that would 
be affected if those limits were to be adjusted upward.  The report of that work 
group was submitted on November 30 of this year and is currently under review by 
this Court.  Given the recent interest by the Florida Legislature in adjusting county 
court jurisdiction, it is possible county court jurisdiction thresholds for civil cases, 
the procedures and path for appeals in certain cases, and small claims jurisdiction 
amounts may be adjusted.  Precise estimates of how these changes would affect 
objective measures are challenging when considered individually and more so 
 
- 4 - 
when multiple adjustments are contemplated.  Any of the changes can reasonably 
be expected to shift workload in county, circuit, and appellate courts. 
Additionally, trial court judges report that changes in law since the current 
case weights were developed in 2015 have resulted in more judicial involvement in 
cases generally.  An example is the recent amendments to section 790.401, Florida 
Statutes (2018), creating an action known as a petition for a risk protection order to 
prevent persons who are at high risk of harming themselves or others from 
accessing firearms or ammunition.  Since enactment of this legislation in March 
2018, the courts have handled approximately 100 of these actions per month 
around the state.  The impact of this and other legislation, such as section 
825.1035, Florida Statutes (2018), the statute creating vulnerable adult injunctions, 
requires careful assessment. 
Similarly, with the growth of problem-solving courts throughout the state 
and the increased number of cases handled by those problem-solving courts, it is 
important for this Court, in its consideration of assessment of judicial need, to 
evaluate the impact to judicial workload these courts create.  While these courts 
show positive results in reduced recidivism and better outcomes for citizens, they 
also require significantly more judicial time. 
This Court is reluctant to decertify judgeships while important reviews it has 
ordered, some of which may revise the very rules governing its analysis, are 
 
- 5 - 
pending.  Specifically, this Court has directed the Commission on Trial Court 
Performance and Accountability to review Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 
2.240.  This review will include an assessment of the secondary factors influencing 
judicial certification to determine if there are areas of inconsistency, overlap, or 
gaps between current factors in the case-weight formula and the unique local 
differences reported by the chief judges in the secondary factors portion of the 
evaluation of judicial need.  The Commission has been specifically instructed to 
review rules 2.240(b)(1)(B) and 2.240(c), Florida Rules of Judicial Administration, 
concerning secondary factors to determine if there is a need to recommend 
modifications. 
Finally, we note a need to monitor and consider any increases in litigation in 
the storm-impacted areas of the state, especially indebtedness and contract cases 
associated with Hurricane Irma in 2017 and Hurricane Michael in October 2018. 
Having conducted a quantitative assessment of trial court and appellate court 
judicial workload and, as noted above, having also considered the various 
qualitative factors, workload trends, and uncertainties under consideration by this 
Court, we certify the need for eight additional trial court judges in Florida, 
consisting of four in circuit court and four in county court, as set forth in the 
appendix to this opinion.  We are also recommending the decertification of three 
 
- 6 - 
county court judgeships, also identified in the appendix, and we certify no need for 
additional judges in the district courts of appeal.   
It is so ordered. 
CANADY, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, POLSTON, LABARGA, 
and LAWSON, JJ., concur. 
 
Original Proceeding – Certification of Need for Additional Judges 
 
 
 
- 7 - 
APPENDIX 
Trial Court Need 
 
Circuit 
Circuit Court 
Certified 
Judges 
County 
County Court 
Certified 
Judges 
County Court 
Decertified 
Judges 
1 
1 
N/A 
0 
0 
2 
0 
N/A 
0 
0 
3 
0 
N/A 
0 
0 
4 
0 
N/A 
0 
0 
5 
0 
N/A 
0 
0 
6 
0 
Pasco 
0 
1 
7 
0 
N/A 
0 
0 
8 
0 
N/A 
0 
0 
9 
2 
N/A 
0 
0 
10 
0 
N/A 
0 
0 
11 
0 
N/A 
0 
0 
12 
0 
N/A 
0 
0 
13 
0 
Hillsborough 
4 
0 
14 
1 
N/A 
0 
0 
15 
0 
N/A 
0 
0 
16 
0 
N/A 
0 
0 
17 
0 
N/A 
0 
0 
18 
0 
Brevard 
0 
2 
19 
0 
N/A 
0 
0 
20 
0 
N/A 
0 
0 
Total 
4 
Total 
4 
3