Becker v. Becker
Husband moved to disqualify the trial judge in his dissolution case after learning that the wife's counsel had represented the judge in the judge's own contested divorce roughly three years earlier, a fact neither the judge nor counsel disclosed. The Third District granted prohibition, holding the verified motion legally sufficient because the undisclosed prior attorney-client relationship created an objectively reasonable fear of bias.
Key facts
- Husband sought to disqualify the trial judge in his dissolution of marriage case after discovering that the wife's attorney had previously represented the judge in the judge's own contested divorce proceedings approximately three years earlier, with neither the judge nor counsel disclosing this prior relationship.
- The trial judge and the wife's counsel failed to disclose the prior attorney-client relationship at any point in the husband's case.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
Gives litigators a citable Third DCA rule that a judge's undisclosed prior attorney-client relationship with a party's lawyer — especially one arising from the judge's own divorce — supplies legal sufficiency for a… — full analysis with a trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.