Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

643 So. 2d 687

Docket No. 94-2139.

Zaias v. Kaye

Nardo ZAIAS, et al., Petitioners, v. Honorable Robert P. KAYE, Respondent.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided October 12, 1994.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1994-10-12

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“`specific and substantial political relationship'”

quoted by 2 later decisions, including Braynen v. State, 829 So. 2d 967 - Neiman-Marcus Group, Inc. v. Robinson

“fact that an attorney made a campaign contribution to a judge or served [as one of over sixty members] on a judge's campaign committee does not, without more, require disqualification.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Braynen v. State

Relies on 576 So. 2d 281 - State v. Williams · 565 So. 2d 1332 - MacKenzie v. Super Kids Bargain Store, Inc. · 488 So. 2d 627 - Caleffe v. Vitale

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1994-10-12

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently June 2018

6 state decisions

30199420002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Murphy & Roig, and Patrick J. Murphy, Fort Lauderdale, for petitioners.

¶2Robert A. Ginsburg, County Atty., and Roy Wood, Asst. County Atty., for respondent.

¶3Before BASKIN, JORGENSON, and GERSTEN, JJ.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5Petitioners seek a writ of prohibition challenging respondent's denial of a motion for disqualification. We deny the petition.

¶6On August 31, 1994, petitioners moved to disqualify respondent, Judge Robert P. Kaye, because opposing counsel contributed to Judge Kaye's re-election campaign and served as one of over sixty members on his campaign committee. Petitioners alleged that difficulties they encountered in scheduling a hearing on their summary judgment motion evidenced the judge's bias. Judge Kaye has been re-elected, and the case is set for trial in the near future.

¶7The fact that an attorney made a campaign contribution to a judge or served on a judge's campaign committee does not, without more, require disqualification. Nathanson v. Korvick,577 So.2d 943 (Fla. 1991); MacKenzie v. Super Kids Bargain Store, Inc.,565 So.2d 1332 (Fla. 1990). In general, facts must be alleged indicating "a specific and substantial political relationship" between the parties to constitute legally sufficient grounds for disqualification. See MacKenzie v. Super Kids Bargain Store, Inc.,*688565 So.2d at 1338 n. 5 (quoting Caleffe v. Vitale,488 So.2d 627 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)).

¶8We note also that we are not faced with the circumstances present in Barber v. MacKenzie,562 So.2d 755 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990), review denied,576 So.2d 288 (Fla. 1991), where during the trial, counsel served as a member of the judge's contemporaneously active campaign committee. For these reasons, we deny the petition for a writ of prohibition.

¶9Petition denied.

/643/so2d/687 · .json · Public domain