Quiambao v. Quiambao
The Sixth DCA granted a writ of prohibition where the second judge assigned to a case denied a motion to disqualify by ruling on the truth of the facts alleged. The court held that a judge who takes over after the prior judge recused sua sponte (rather than on a granted disqualification motion) is not a 'successor judge' under Rule 2.330(i), so she could assess only legal sufficiency under Rule 2.330(h). The court denied the petition as to the summary final judgment, holding that reducing a pre-motion oral ruling to writing is a permissible ministerial act.
Key facts
- Plaintiff Quiambao filed a disqualification motion against the second judge assigned to the case after the first judge recused sua sponte without ruling on any pending disqualification motion.
- The second judge denied the disqualification motion by ruling on the truth of the factual allegations rather than limiting her review to legal sufficiency.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
Practitioners handling disqualification motions should note the sharp distinction drawn here: a sua sponte recusal does not convert the next judge into a Rule 2.330(i) 'successor judge,' so that judge may not pass on… — 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.