Sands Pointe Ocean Beach Resort Condominium Ass'n, Inc. v. Aelion (consolidated prohibition petitions)
Twenty-seven consolidated petitions for writs of prohibition sought to disqualify an incumbent Miami-Dade circuit judge in cases handled by a large law firm, one of whose attorneys (not counsel of record in any of the cases) was the judge's sole election opponent. The Third DCA held the verified motions alleging 'inherent' bias by imputation of the candidacy to every firm lawyer were legally insufficient, and denied all petitions.
📄 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
- Twenty-seven consolidated petitions sought to disqualify a Miami-Dade circuit judge in cases handled by a large law firm, based solely on the candidacy of one firm attorney (not counsel of record) who was running against the incumbent judge.
- The petitioners filed verified motions alleging the judge would be inherently biased against all attorneys from the candidate's firm due to the judicial candidacy of their colleague.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This is the first Florida appellate decision addressing whether an attorney's candidacy against a sitting judge disqualifies that judge in all cases handled by the candidate's law firm, and the answer is no absent a… — 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.