On May 23, 2024, the Supreme Court of Florida issued two opinions in its ongoing effort to promote active case management. Effective January 1, 2025, the Court amended the following Florida Rules of Civil Procedure:
Rule 1.200. Case Management; Pretrial Procedure
Rule 1.201. Complex Litigation
With some exceptions, trial courts must assign each civil case to one of three case management tracks (complex, general, or streamlined) no later than 120 days after the case commences. Whether by case management order (“CMO”), or by circuit chief judge’s order, each civil case receives its assignment based on required judicial attention. This framework allows each circuit to adjust for varying levels of volume, resources, and available automation.
Litigants with mutual factual knowledge; limited discovery needs; well-established legal issues; few dispositive pretrial motions; minimal documentary evidence; and likely no more than three trial days usually fall under streamlined cases. Rule 1.201(a) defines a complex case as a case with complicated legal or case management issues, which may require extensive judicial management to expedite the action, keep costs reasonable, or promote judicial efficiency. The same Rule now permits the trial court to hold a hearing to determine whether a case is complex. The remaining cases are considered general.
Rule 1.200 includes a procedure for streamlined and general cases to modify CMO deadlines. Although deadlines “must be strictly enforced unless changed by court order,” parties may still submit an agreed order to extend them contingent upon compliance with the remaining CMO deadlines. A court may set a case management conference (“CMC”) at any time on its own—or a party’s—notice. A party’s notice must identify the issues to address at the CMC with a list of all pending motions. Similarly upon the court’s notice, it may address scheduling issues or pending motions at the CMC other than motions for summary judgment (“MSJ”) and motions requiring evidentiary hearings.
Rule 1.280. General Provisions Governing Discovery
The amended Rule 1.280 mandates certain initial discovery disclosures within 60 days after service of a complaint, and imposes a duty to supplement discovery. The Court further incorporates the proportionality language of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) into Rule 1.280(c).
Rule 1.440. Setting Action for Trial
Notably, Rule 1.440 eliminates the “at issue” requirement that formerly precluded the court from setting a case for trial while a motion to dismiss is pending. Under the new subdivision (c) “Fixing Trial Period,” a court considers when it finds the case ready for trial, the CMO and case management track, and any motions by parties when fixing the trial period. The order setting the trial period must set the trial period to begin at least 30 days after the date of the court’s service of the order, unless the parties agree otherwise.
Rule 1.460. Motions to Continue Trial
In the spirit of promoting “the fair and timely resolution of civil cases,” amended Rule 1.460 incentivizes trial courts to avoid continuances and disincentivizes lawyers to request them. “Motions to continue trial are disfavored and should rarely be granted and then only upon good cause shown.” In general, Rule 1.460 mandates a prompt, written motion to continue trial with the requesting party’s signature after the appearance of good cause to support the motion. The motion must state the basis for the continuance; any opposition; the actions and specific dates of such actions that will allow the movant to be ready for trial by the proposed date; and the proposed trial date. When possible, the parties must collaborate for continued trial dates. Dilatory conduct by the attorneys, the parties, or both can result in sanctions.
Rule 1.510. Summary Judgment
Amended Rule 1.510 ties the deadline to respond to a MSJ to its service date rather than its hearing date. Opposing parties must file a response to a MSJ no later than 60 days after the MSJ’s service date.
Rule 1.202. Conferral Prior to Filing Motions
Newly adopted Rule 1.202 requires that the parties make a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised prior to filing a non-dispositive motion. The duty to confer applies to all motions except motions for injunctive relief, motions for judgment on the pleadings, MSJs, motions to dismiss or to permit maintenance of a class action, motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim, or motions to involuntarily dismiss an action. Along with the motion, the movant must file a certificate of conferral to better position the trial judge to solve problems between parties at a hearing.
Our Firm
Rossway Swan’s Litigation Counsel comprises of a broad range of experiences dedicated to protecting our clients’ rights and interests. Contact us today to learn more about how we can assist you in protecting and advancing your interests as changes in the legal landscape occur.
Prepared by the Civil Litigation Practice Group at Rossway Swan Tierney Barry & Oliver, P.L. Contact Thomas W. Tierney, Cole Oliver, Paul R. Amos, or Lily Chen for more information.
