Opinion
Case No. 8:09-cv-1351-T-30AEP.
December 1, 2010
ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendants Robert Santa Lucia and Santa Lucia Thomas P.A.'s Emergency Motion for Reconsideration or, in the Alternative, Motion for Clarification (Dkt. 142). Defendants ask the Court to reconsider a previous endorsed order denying Defendants' Motion to Depose for Trial Judge Gaspar Ficarotta, the judge in the underlying action. The Court denies Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration but grants the Motion for Clarification.
Defendants' Motion to Depose Judge Ficarotta was denied because the evidence is inadmissible at trial. It is inappropriate to explore the impressions or mental reasoning of a judge in the entering of an order. Fayerweather v. Ritch, 195 U.S. 276, 306-307 (U.S. 1904); United States v. Cross, 516 F. Supp. 700, 707 (M.D. Ga. 1981), aff'd, 742 F2d (11th Cir. 1984); Stein v. Prof'l Ctr., 666 So. 2d 264, 265-266 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3d Dist. 1996).
It is therefore ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
1. Defendants Robert Santa Lucia and Santa Lucia Thomas P.A.'s Emergency Motion for Reconsideration (Dkt. 142) is DENIED.
2. Defendants Robert Santa Lucia and Santa Lucia Thomas P.A.'s Alternative Motion for Clarification (Dkt. 142) is GRANTED.
DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida on December 1, 2010.