Significant amendments to Florida's rules of civil procedure are on the horizon, taking effect on January 1, 2025. The amendments will impact a variety of areas, ranging from pretrial discovery and motion practice to judicial case management, and trial continuances. The changes issued by the Florida Supreme Court are designed to streamline civil case administration, better ensure timely judicial decisions, and generally improve efficiency in civil litigation. Notably, the rules introduce new standards for complex cases, deadlines for discovery, and changes to trial procedures. Attorneys and legal professionals practicing in Florida should familiarize themselves with these developments to navigate the new procedural landscape effectively. Although the amendments are intended to bring improvement, many of these changes are likely to be marred by early growing pains for practicing attorneys as well as the judges who are already under extreme pressure associated with court dockets already saturated from the influx of new case filings that were spurred by recent tort reform.
Changes to Judicial Case Management and Pre-Trial Discovery
The revisions to Rule 1.200 and Rule 1.201 effectively overhaul case management procedures. Courts will now assign all civil cases to one of three alternative management tracks - complex, general, or streamlined - within one hundred twenty (120) days of the filing of Plaintiff's Complaint. The Supreme Court of Florida explicitly stated in its Amendment that "[a]ssignment [will] not based on the financial value of the case but rather the amount of judicial attention required for resolution." Changes in track assignment can be requested by a party or directed by the Court on its own motion.
Further, Case Management Orders will be issued based on a case's assigned track. However, regardless of track, it is clear that strict deadlines for discovery and pretrial motions must be, and will be, enforced. In complex litigation, parties are required to notify the court if a case management conference or hearing becomes unnecessary, further reducing unnecessary delays. In general cases, the court must issue a case management order that lays out the projected or actual trial period based on the case track assignment.
Deadlines in case management orders "must be strictly enforced unless changed by court order" but parties may "submit an agreed order to extend a deadline if the extension doesn't affect the ability to comply with the remaining dates in a case management order." This is one of, if not the most, jarring change to come from the string of amendments. Gone are the days of the illusory deadlines of the case management order and now are hard, set-in-stone case-related deadlines.
Requests by parties to modify scheduled trial periods are governed by Rule 1.460. If a trial does not take place within the court-ordered trial period, the court is required to issue an order setting a new trial period as soon as practicable, considering the needs of the case and the court's available resources. Additionally, the court may schedule case management conferences at any time, either on its own initiative or upon proper notice of a party. When a party provides notice for such a conference, the notice must specify the issues to be addressed and include a list of all pending motions.
Changes to Trial Setting
The amendment to Rule 1.440 removes the "at issue" requirement, allowing the court to schedule a trial even while the pleadings remain open. The courts have been hinting at this upcoming change, incorporating options to waive the "at issue" requirement as early as the entrance of the Case Management Order, for quite some time now. However, in practice, the changes to Rule 1.440 will likely be a bit of a culture shock to Florida practitioners. Upon motion by a party or at its own discretion, the court may set a trial date earlier than the projected trial period outlined in the case management order. For cases governed by Rule 1.200, the court must issue an order establishing the trial period no later than 45 days before the trial period specified in the case management order.
Changes to Motions for Summary Judgment and Trial Continuances
A complete rewrite of Rule 1.460 tightens the standards for granting trial continuances, emphasizing that such motions are disfavored and should only be granted in rare circumstances. Attorneys seeking continuance must now demonstrate good cause, outline specific steps they will take to be ready for trial, and propose a new trial date. Again, this amendment to the Rules governing trial orders and dates will be game changing, as a trial date will now be essentially set in stone.
Essentially, a Court may now submit a trial order at any time during the litigation, given the removal of the "at issue" requirement, and that trial order will be more or less set in stone. This amendment to how the trial order process operates will surely alter how attorneys operate in the civil realm.
Further reform includes Rule 1.510, which clarifies the timing for filing and responding to motions for summary judgment. Responses must now be filed within sixty (60) days of the motion's service, rather than the hearing date, ensuring parties have sufficient time to prepare.
Additionally, Rule 1.820(h) outlines the procedure for rejecting an arbitrator's decision and requesting a trial de novo. Parties have twenty (20) days to file a notice of rejection following service of the arbitrator's written decision, or the arbitration decision will stand.
Changes to Florida's Rules on Service, Filing and Depositions
Recent updates to Florida's civil procedure rules introduce key changes to the filing and handling of transcripts and depositions. Rule 1.080, titled, "Service and Filing of Pleadings, Orders. Documents, and Transcripts" now includes a new subsection(d) addressing the format of the filed transcripts. Under this new rule, condensed transcripts may be authorized by the court, and all PDF versions must be in full-page, text-searchable format to ensure accessibility and efficiency in court proceedings.
Rule 1.310, has been updated to include "or other entity" in the list of those that can be named as deponents, now encompassing limited liability companies (LLCs) and other organizations, aligning Florida's rule with the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6) includes public or private corporations, partnerships, associations, government agencies, and includes a catchall by including the language: "or other entity."
Additionally, subsection(d) and (f) have been revised to replace references to specific provisions of Rule 1.280 with general references to allow the court greater discretion in limiting the scope and manner of depositions. These revisions ensure consistency with the Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.425 and Rule 1.280 when filing deposition copies. These changes aim to streamline court processes while maintaining flexibility and alignment with federal procedures, as well as encouraging counsels to meet and confer on discovery-related issues, to further stay on the theme of expediting resolution with less judicial intervention.
Changes to Asserting Affirmative Defenses
Per Rule 1.110(d), attorneys must now provide a clear and concise statement of ultimate facts when asserting affirmative defenses. Prior to this amendment, a defendant's affirmative defenses did not have to be pled with supporting factual evidence, and had the ability to be more broad. This additional language forces counsel to dive into factual issues as early as the answering stage of the litigation. The mandatory factual statements could prevent inapplicable and unsubstantiated affirmative defenses being laundry-listed in a defendant's answer. The Rule 1.110(d) amendment went into effect on July 1, 2024.
Changes to Conferral Requirements Before Filing Motions
Under Rule 1.202, parties are required to confer before filing non-dispositive motions, promoting collaboration and the resolution of disputes without judicial intervention. Notably, parties are not required to confer on motions for summary judgment, nor those seeking injunctive relief. The duty is imposed upon the moving party to ensure a meet and confer occurs prior to the filing of the motion. The movant is also required to file a Certificate of Conferral with the motion, addressing the date and means of the conference, and whether there was an agreement as to the relief sought, and the efforts made to obtain such an agreement. Further, a certification of the opposing party's unavailability for a conference must detail all efforts to communicate before filing the motion. This assists the trial judge in addressing disputes more effectively during the hearing. Due to limited hearing time, parties are expected to confer and attempt to resolve issues prior to requesting a hearing. This rule aims to reduce the courts workload while encouraging attorneys to work together to resolve minor issues prior to seeking judicial intervention.
Changes to Discovery Proportionality
Rule 1.280 introduces the concept of proportionality into discovery, aligning Florida's procedure with Federal Rule 26(b)(1). The courts will assess the following to determine proportionality: importance of the issues at stake, amount in controversy, the parties' access to relevant information, the parties' resources, the importance of discovery in resolving issues, and whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit. Although the notion of proportionality has been an integral part of the discovery process, usually seen in objections, it is interesting to see it now codified by the Court. Additionally, parties must make certain discovery disclosures within 60 days of the complaint or joinder, expediting the exchange of critical information early in the litigation process. Initial disclosure must include, at a minimum, the names and contact information of individuals likely to have discoverable information, a copy or description of documents that may be used to support claims or defenses, a computation for each category of damages claimed by the disclosing party, and any insurance agreements that may satisfy part or all of a judgment. This initial discovery disclosure will likely prove to be an invaluable tool, as to allow counsel to propound nuanced discovery requests, instead of being forced to waste limited requests on obtaining generalized information from opposing counsel The rule also requires parties to supplement discovery when appropriate. The duty to supplement will now be ongoing throughout the course of litigation.
Changes to Judicial Accountability
Rule 2.215(g) and the amended subdivision under Rule 2.215 increase judicial accountability, requiring judges to maintain a monthly log of all matters held under advisement for more than sixty (60) days. Parties may prompt judicial action by filing a notice with the clerk to remind the judge of any matters reaching the sixty (60) day mark to ensure timely rulings. These measures are designed to prevent prolonged delays in the court system and uphold the efficient administration of justice.
Rule 2.250(a) has also been amended to add a time standard of thirty (30) months for complex cases and to clarify when the time standards for civil cases begin and end.
Rule 2.250(b) requires each circuit's chief judge to submit an annual report listing all active civil cases that have been pending for over three (3) years to the chief justice and state court administrator.
New forms, 2.605 and 2.606, provide sample notices of case status. Parties can file a motion to request a change in case status. However, unless there's a stipulation that an appellate ruling will resolve the case or extraordinary circumstances are shown, the court won't grant a request to place the case on inactive status.
Conclusion
The upcoming changes to Florida's civil procedure rules mark a significant shift toward improving the efficiency and transparency of civil litigation. By introducing stricter case management practices, refining discovery protocols, and holding both judges and attorneys accountable for delays, these amendments seek to streamline the litigation process for all parties involved. Legal practitioners should closely review these rules to ensure compliance and to maintain competitive edge in navigating Florida's legal landscape.