Case Title: In Re: Amendments To Florida Small Claims Rule 7.090

Citation: 

Docket Number: SC10-1227

State: florida

Court: Florida Supreme Court

Date: 2011-05-12T00:00:00Z

Document:
Supreme Court of Florida 
 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC10-1227 
____________ 
 
 
IN RE:  AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA SMALL CLAIMS RULE 7.090. 
 
[May 12, 2011] 
 
PER CURIAM. 
 
This matter is before the Court for consideration of proposed amendments to 
Florida Small Claims Rule 7.090 (Appearance; Defensive Pleadings; Trial Date).  
We have jurisdiction.  See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const. 
 
The Florida Bar Small Claims Rules Committee (Committee) has proposed 
amendments to rule 7.090, subdivisions (a) (Appearance), and (b) (Notice to 
Appear; Pretrial Conference).  The amendments proposed would require that the 
pretrial conference in a small claims action be conducted before a judge.  The 
Committee’s proposals to amend rule 7.090 were first presented to the Court for 
consideration as a part of the Committee’s regular-cycle report, filed in January 
2010.1  At that time, the Court published each of the Committee’s proposed 
                                         
 
1.  The Board of Governors of The Florida Bar unanimously approved the 
Committee’s regular-cycle report. 
 
- 2 - 
amendments for comment in The Florida Bar News.  The Court received a number 
of comments from the public specifically addressing the proposal to amend rule 
7.090.  Ultimately, because the Court determined that this proposal warranted 
further study, we entered an order directing that the proposed amendments to rule 
7.090 be severed from the regular-cycle report and addressed separately in the 
instant case.  See In re Amendments to the Florida Small Claims Rules, No. SC10-
144 (Fla. order to sever entered July 1, 2010).2  We also requested supplemental 
materials from the Committee, the Commission on Trial Court Performance and 
Accountability, the Conference of County Court Judges, and any other party who 
filed comments specifically addressing rule 7.090.  See In re Amendments to 
Florida Small Claims Rule 7.090, No. SC10-1227 (Fla. order requesting 
supplemental report entered July 1, 2010).  As a result, the Court received several 
additional comments, some in favor of and some opposed to the Committee’s 
proposed amendments to rule 7.090.  Upon consideration of these comments, we 
decline to adopt the amendments to rule 7.090 as proposed by the Committee.  
Instead, we adopt the language suggested in the comment from the Sixth Judicial 
Circuit Court, which allows management of the pretrial conference by nonjudicial 
                                         
 
2.  The Court ultimately adopted the remaining amendments to the Small 
Claims Rules and Forms as proposed in the Committee’s report.  See In re 
Amendments to the Florida Small Claims Rules, 44 So. 3d 573 (Fla. 2010). 
 
- 3 - 
personnel subject to direct supervision by the trial judge and mandates that a trial 
judge be available should his or her presence be necessary. 
Accordingly, we amend the Florida Small Claims Rules as set forth in the 
appendix to this opinion.  New language is indicated by underscoring; deletions are 
indicated by struck-through type.  These amendments shall take effect on July 1, 
2011, at 12:01 a.m. 
It is so ordered. 
CANADY, C.J., and LEWIS, POLSTON, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur. 
PARIENTE, J., concurs in result with an opinion, in which QUINCE, J., concurs. 
 
THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR REHEARING SHALL NOT ALTER THE 
EFFECTIVE DATE OF THESE AMENDMENTS. 
 
 
PARIENTE, J., concurring in result. 
I concur in the majority’s adoption of a revision to the rule in the hope that it 
serves the same purpose as the rule proposed by the Florida Bar Small Claims 
Rules Committee and supported by the Conference of County Court Judges.  
However, I would have preferred to adopt the rule as proposed, which made clear 
that at the time of the pretrial conference the plaintiff and defendant appear before 
a judge, but also explained by a proposed committee note that: 
This change is not intended to prohibit the use of hearing officers, 
mediators, and other non-judicial court personnel as part of the 
pretrial process. 
 
 
- 4 - 
Therefore the proposed rule would not have prevented nonjudicial personnel from 
greeting litigants, explaining the process, calling the docket, or sending the parties 
to mediation.  Rather, as explained by the Committee, the only counties that would 
be affected are those where the parties do not see a judge before trial and the 
current inquiry under rule 7.090(b) is not conducted. 
While I encourage the use of nonjudicial personnel, particularly mediators, 
to make the process more efficient and effective, especially in resolving the matter 
without trial, I stress that the availability of the judge must be meaningful and 
contemporaneous with the time of the pretrial conference.  At the present time, at 
least two of the counties, Lake County and Madison County, reported that if the 
case does not resolve at mediation on the day of the pretrial conference, the pretrial 
conference is set for a later date before a judge.  While this may be convenient for 
judges, it is completely inconvenient for the litigants who are typically 
unrepresented, who have ―small claims,‖ and who must then take another day off 
from work to attend the pretrial conference with attendant, and often extreme, 
financial hardship. 
The existing version of rule 7.090(b) mandates that six matters be 
considered at the pretrial conference.  The rule as proposed by the Committee 
made clear that those six matters must be determined by a judge (words underlined 
are the proposed addition to the rule): 
 
- 5 - 
(b) 
Notice to Appear; Pretrial Conference.  The 
summons/notice to appear shall specify that the initial appearance 
shall be for a pretrial conference.  The initial pretrial conference shall 
be set by the clerk not more than 50 days from the date of the filing of 
the action.  At the pretrial conference, all of the following matters 
shall be considered by a judge: 
 
 
 
(1) 
The simplification of issues. 
 
 
 
(2) 
The necessity or desirability of amendments to the 
pleadings. 
 
 
 
(3) 
The possibility of obtaining admissions of fact and 
of documents that avoid unnecessary proof. 
 
 
 
(4) 
The limitations on the number of witnesses. 
 
 
 
(5) 
The possibilities of settlement. 
 
 
 
(6) 
Such other matters as the court in its discretion 
deems necessary. 
 
The purpose of the amendment is to ensure that a party sees a judge at the pretrial 
conference and that the issues listed above are determined by a judge. 
As explained by the Conference of County Court Judges, which supports the 
proposals, small claims cases are different from most civil cases.  Small claims 
actions are processed through Florida’s county courts under a set of rules with a 
stated goal to reach a ―simple, speedy, and inexpensive‖ resolution of these cases.  
The current procedural structure provides for only two appearances: a pretrial 
conference, at which mediation may take place, and a trial.  The stated goals and 
 
- 6 - 
tight timeframes in the rules make it clear that additional appearances, as well as an 
active motion practice, are discouraged. 
The Conference further explains that typically, at a pretrial conference, a 
small claims case may take one of several courses.  First, if the plaintiff does not 
appear, the case may be dismissed.  Second, if the defendant does not appear, a 
default may be entered.  Third, if both parties appear, the case may be referred to 
mediation.  Finally, if none of the first three resolutions is applicable, or if the case 
does not settle in mediation, the Small Claims Rules require that the court ―shall‖ 
consider during pretrial the six items currently set out in rule 7.090(b).  At this 
point, the court may also determine that the case presents ―no triable issue‖ and 
enter a summary disposition pursuant to Small Claims Rule 7.135. 
The Conference explains that the Committee’s proposed amendments would 
more clearly require that a judge preside over the pretrial conference in small 
claims actions.  Currently, the majority of Florida counties provide for judges to 
preside at such conferences.  Nonetheless, in a small minority of counties, the 
pretrial procedures differ, with varying degrees of judicial involvement.  While 
nonjudicial personnel may assist the judge in handling pretrial conferences—
including calling the docket, referring cases to a mediator, noting nonappearances 
for the court, and collecting settlement documents for the judge—the Conference 
believes a judge must actually be involved at that stage. 
 
- 7 - 
I would defer to the expertise of the Committee and the Conference, which 
voted by ―overwhelming majority‖ to recommend adoption of the Committee’s 
proposed amendments.  However, I emphasize that under the substituted rule 
adopted by this opinion, a ―judge must be available to hear any motions and 
resolve any legal issues,‖ which would presumably include the six matters set forth 
in subdivision (b).  Hopefully, the availability of the judge will be meaningful so 
that litigants are able to obtain what the rules require: ―a simple, speedy, and 
inexpensive‖ resolution of these cases. 
QUINCE, J., concurs. 
 
 
Original Proceeding – Florida Small Claims Rule Committee 
 
Michele A. Cavallaro, Chair Small Claims Rules Committee, Fidelity National 
Title Group, Inc., Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Judge Robert W. Lee, Past Chair Small 
Claims Rules Committee, Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 
and John F. Harkness, Jr., Executive Director, The Florida Bar, Tallahassee, 
Florida, 
 
 
for Petitioner 
 
Judge Pauline Drake, Fourth Judicial Circuit, Jacksonville, Florida, on behalf of 
the County Court Judges of the Fourth Judicial Circuit; Judge Walt A. Fullerton,  
Sixth Judicial Circuit, St. Petersburg, Florida; Chief Judge J. Thomas McGrady, B. 
Elaine New, Court Counsel, and Christina Everton, Staff Attorney, Sixth Judicial 
Circuit, St. Petersburg, Florida; Chief Judge G. Keith Cary, Twentieth Judicial 
Circuit, Ft. Myers, Florida, Judge Wayne Miller, President, Conference of County 
Court Judges of Florida, Sixteenth Judicial Circuit, Key West, Florida, and Chief 
Judge Terry David Terrell, Chair, Commission on Trial Court Performance and 
Accountability, First Judicial Circuit, Pensacola, Florida, 
 
 
Responding with comments 
 
- 8 - 
APPENDIX 
 
 
RULE 7.090. 
APPEARANCE; DEFENSIVE PLEADINGS; TRIAL 
DATE 
 
(a) 
[No change] 
 
(b) Notice to Appear; Pretrial Conference.  The summons/notice to appear 
shall specify that the initial appearance shall be for a pretrial conference.  The 
initial pretrial conference shall be set by the clerk not more than 50 days from the 
date of the filing of the action.  The pretrial conference may be managed by 
nonjudicial personnel employed by or under contract with the court.  Nonjudicial 
personnel must be subject to direct oversight by the court.  A judge must be 
available to hear any motions or resolve any legal issues.  At the pretrial 
conference, all of the following matters shall be considered: 
 
(1) The simplification of issues. 
 
(2) The necessity or desirability of amendments to the pleadings. 
 
(3) The possibility of obtaining admissions of fact and of documents that 
avoid unnecessary proof. 
 
(4) The limitations on the number of witnesses. 
 
(5) The possibilities of settlement. 
 
(6) Such other matters as the court in its discretion deems necessary. 
 
Form 7.322 shall and form 7.323 may be used in conjunction with this rule. 
 
(c) – (g) 
[No Change] 
 
 
Committee Notes 
 
[No Change] 
 
 
- 9 - 
Court Commentary 
 
[No Change]