38.10
Disqualification of judge for prejudice; application; affidavits; etc.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
38.10 Disqualification of judge for prejudice; application; affidavits; etc.—Whenever a party to any action or proceeding makes and files an affidavit stating fear that he or she will not receive a fair trial in the court where the suit is pending on account of the prejudice of the judge of that court against the applicant or in favor of the adverse party, the judge shall proceed no further, but another judge shall be designated in the manner prescribed by the laws of this state for the substitution of judges for the trial of causes in which the presiding judge is disqualified. Every such affidavit shall state the facts and the reasons for the belief that any such bias or prejudice exists and shall be accompanied by a certificate of counsel of record that such affidavit and application are made in good faith. However, when any party to any action has suggested the disqualification of a trial judge and an order has been made admitting the disqualification of such judge and another judge has been assigned and transferred to act in lieu of the judge so held to be disqualified, the judge so assigned and transferred is not disqualified on account of alleged prejudice against the party making the suggestion in the first instance, or in favor of the adverse party, unless such judge admits and holds that it is then a fact that he or she does not stand fair and impartial between the parties. If such judge holds, rules, and adjudges that he or she does stand fair and impartial as between the parties and their respective interests, he or she shall cause such ruling to be entered on the minutes of the court and shall proceed to preside as judge in the pending cause. The ruling of such judge may be assigned as error and may be reviewed as are other rulings of the trial court.
History.—s. 4, ch. 7852, 1919; RGS 2674; s. 1, ch. 9276, 1923; CGL 4341; s. 3, ch. 83-260; s. 212, ch. 95-147.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 195
cases (11 in the last 5 years), 1944–2025 · leading case: Brown v. St. George Island, Ltd.
Brown v. St. George Island, Ltd. (1990)
“1st DCA 1989), wherein the district court of appeal certified the unarticulated question of how to interpret section 38.10, Florida Statutes (1989). We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4), Florida Constitution.”
Livingston v. State (1983)
“In this motion, which was filed under section 38.10, Florida Statutes (1979), appellant set forth specific conflicts between his attorney and the trial judge, concluding that "Judge Fleet is so biased and prejudiced and has so much animosity against his counsel, Charles A.”
& SC16-1279 Robert Earl Peterson v. State of Florida and Robert Earl Peterson v. Julie L. Jones, etc. (2017)
“” § 38.10, Fla. Stat. (2014). “The judge against whom an initial 3.”
Lynch v. State (2009)
“160, [6] section 38.10, Florida Statutes (2006), and Canon 3E(1) of the Code of Judicial Conduct.”
Hayslip v. Douglas (1981)
“and Section 38.10, Florida Statutes (1979). First, the motion must be made by a party; it must be verified, and it must allege the facts relied upon to show the grounds for disqualification.”
Sikes v. Seaboard Coast Line R. Co. (1983)
“SCL filed a motion to strike the appellant's motion to recuse, alleging that the motion to recuse did not meet the technical requirements of a recusal motion embodied in Section 38.10, Florida Statutes. [8] Among other requirements, the statute mandates that the allegations are…”
Gregory v. State (2013)
“” § 38.10, Fla Stat. (2011). “The judge against whom an initial motion to disqualify .”
Quince v. State (1999)
“" § 38.10, Fla. Stat. (1995). The record shows that Judge Johnson heard argument, recessed to consider the law, then held that he stood fair and impartial in Quince's case.”
Law Offices of Herssein and Herssein, P.A., etc. v. United Services Automobile Association (2018)
“2017) (quoting § 38.10, Fla. Stat. (2014)). The rule provides that “[t]he judge against whom an initial motion to disqualify .”
Montgomery Blair Sibley v. Maxine Cohen Lando (2005)
“Sibley asserts that, under Fla. Stat. § 38.10 , a litigant need only file an affidavit stating that he fears he will not receive a fair trial in order to bar a judge from proceeding.”
Kokal v. State (2005)
“§ 38.10, Fla. Stat. (2003). Similarly, rule 2.”
Fischer v. Knuck (1986)
“The Code of Judicial Conduct sets forth basic principles of how judges should conduct themselves in carrying out their judicial duties.”
— 38.10(1) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.