sunEthics

General magistrate may not preside over civil jury trial, even with consent of parties.  [Added 6/12/09]

    A General Magistrate presided over a civil jury trial for slander.  Defendant prevailed.  Plaintiff appealed.

    Although the Fifth DCA noted that "it appears that it is the standing practice maintained by the Ninth Judicial Circuit to permit magistrates, on select occasions, to assist with the heavy overload of cases by presiding over civil jury trials," the appellate court found a jurisdictional problem, vacated the judgment, and remanded for proceedings before a circuit judge.

    The court summarized its decision:  "In sum, there is no Florida authority either expressly permitting or prohibiting a magistrate from conducting a civil jury trial with the parties' consent.  However, the relevant state constitutional provisions, statutes, rules, and interpreting decisions indicate that such a practice is not permitted in the absence of an express grant of authority by statute or rule of procedure.  Even if permitted by rule or statute, the order referring the case to the magistrate would also have to specifically grant the authority to preside over the jury trial, and the final order or judgment would have to be entered by the trial court.  Therefore, the magistrate in the present case was not authorized to preside over the jury trial or enter the final judgment, and both were a nullity."  Lackner v. Central Florida Investments, Inc., __ So.3d ___ (Fla. 5th DCA, No. 5D07-3542, 5/29/2009).

sunEthics is produced by Tim Chinaris, and hosted by Faulkner University's Jones School of Law.  Please read our disclaimers.  Search our site, or view previously posted summaries using our SUBJECT INDEX.  © 2009