Martinez v. Guardia
In a high-conflict dissolution case, the wife moved to disqualify opposing counsel after discovering that the husband had given his lawyers mortgages on two disputed properties to secure unpaid fees, allegedly violating Rule 4-1.8(i). The Third District affirmed denial of the motion without reaching the ethics question, holding the motion untimely because the recorded mortgages gave constructive notice eleven months earlier (and actual notice six months earlier via her quiet title suit), she continued litigating to judgment, and the nonmovant would be prejudiced.
📄 Read the official opinion (3rd DCA) →
Florida Court Tracker flags decisions like this the week they come down, sorted by practice area, alongside your research platform. See what else changed in Disqualification / Recusal →
Key facts
- Wife moved to disqualify husband's counsel after discovering the husband had granted mortgages on two disputed properties to his lawyers to secure unpaid fees.
- The trial court denied the disqualification motion without ruling on the ethics merits; the mortgages were recorded eleven months before the motion and discovered by wife six months before through her quiet title suit.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
Gives Florida litigators a clean, citable framework for defeating late-filed disqualification motions: the three-factor timeliness/waiver test, the use of constructive notice under section 695.11 to date the movant's… — full analysis with a trial
Get decisions like this in your practice area every week: free for 14 days
The rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Your practice areas first
- Plain-English holdings & why it matters
- Statutes & rules that take effect in your area
- One Friday briefing for your team
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.