Legal Opinion

Amendments to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided October 23, 2003No. SC03-161Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partLewis, J.

While I certainly appreciate the diligent efforts of the Civil Procedure Rules Committee (Committee), and concur in large part with the majority’s opinion, I cannot agree with the Court’s amendment of rule 1.370(a). Specifically, I conclude that the purported basis for this amendment is unsupported, illogical, and contrary to the goals of Florida’s system of pretrial discovery. Therefore, I dissent from the portion of today’s decision which limits requests for admissions under rule 1.370(a) to thirty individual requests.

In its report to this Court, the Committee’s sole justification for the…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited44 opinions

  1. Stockman v. DownsSupreme Court of Florida · 1991
  2. Mendez v. West Flagler Family Association, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1974
  3. Williams v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1975
  4. McDaniel v. McElvySupreme Court of Florida · 1926
  5. Elmex Corp. v. Atlantic Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n of Fort LauderdaleDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1976

39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API