Opinion
Case No. 5D17–410
02-24-2017
Peter A. SHAPIRO, Petitioner, v. Davina CRAIG, Respondent.
Peter A. Shapiro, of The Law Offices of Peter A. Shapiro & Jonathan D. Wilson, Orlando, pro se. No Appearance for Respondent.
Peter A. Shapiro, of The Law Offices of Peter A. Shapiro & Jonathan D. Wilson, Orlando, pro se.
No Appearance for Respondent.
WALLIS, J.
Peter Shapiro petitions this court for a writ of prohibition following the dismissal of his motion to disqualify the trial judge. Trial courts determine the legal sufficiency of a motion to disqualify by considering whether "the facts alleged (which must be taken as true) would prompt a reasonably prudent person to fear that he could not get a fair and impartial trial." Hayslip v. Douglas , 400 So.2d 553, 556 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (citing Brewton v. Kelly , 166 So.2d 834 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964) ). The allegations cited in the motion to disqualify concerned the trial judge's prior representation of the respondent, Davina Craig, as well as a prior case where Shapiro and the trial judge represented opposing parties in contentious litigation ten years ago. We find that Shapiro's allegations created a well-founded fear in his mind that he would not receive a trial by an impartial tribunal. See Livingston v. State , 441 So.2d 1083 (Fla. 1983) ; K a sser v. Woodson , 549 So.2d 802 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). Therefore, we grant the petition for writ of prohibition.
PETITION GRANTED.
TORPY and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.