Tomax 2015, LLC v. Gevajoni, LLC
The Third District denied prohibition. Every complaint Tomax raised, even if true, was only disagreement with adverse rulings, and adverse rulings alone do not show the bias needed for disqualification. The court also stressed that attorneys may not support an argument with unsworn factual assertions, such as counsel's description of the judge's demeanor.
Key facts
- Tomax petitioned for a writ of prohibition to stop the trial judge from continuing to preside, after the judge denied its motion to disqualify as legally insufficient.
- Tomax argued that the judge entered a final attorney's fee and cost judgment without a hearing, ignored its rehearing and strike motions and its 'fees for fees' objection, and made Tomax liable for all fees without dividing them with a co-party.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Holdings
- Adverse rulings, including disputed fee awards and rulings entered without the hearing a party wanted, do not by themselves make a motion to disqualify legally sufficient. Prohibition will…
- +1 more holding with a free trial
Why it matters
This is a practical reminder for trial and appellate lawyers weighing judicial-disqualification motions after contested fee rulings. Disagreement with how a fee judgment was entered, even alleged due-process shortcuts… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
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.