Skip to content

District Board of Trustees of Miami Dade College v. Marvin Dunn

Court
Florida Third District Court of Appeal
Decided
April 29, 2026
Docket No.
2026-0438

Judges: FERNANDEZ; LOGUE; GORDO

Disposition: granted

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed April 29, 2026. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

No. 3D26-0438

Lower Tribunal No. 25-19608-CA-01

District Board of Trustees of Miami Dade College, Petitioner,

vs.

Marvin Dunn, Respondent.

Case of Original Jurisdiction – Prohibition.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and David Dewhirst, Solicitor General, and Jason J. Muehlhoff, Chief Deputy Solicitor General and Casey J. Witte, Solicitor General Fellow (Tallahassee); Continental PLLC, and Jesus M. Suarez, and Carmen M. Cartaya; Office of Legal Affairs Miami Dade College, and Javier A. Ley-Soto, for petitioner.

Rivero Mestre LLP, and Andres Rivero; and The Brodsky Law Firm, and Richard E. Brodsky, for respondent.

Before FERNANDEZ, LOGUE and GORDO, JJ.

Original opinion page 2
Original opinion page 2
2 PER CURIAM. The District Board of Trustees of Miami Dade College seeks a writ of prohibition preventing the trial judge from conducting further proceedings in its case. “A motion to recuse or disqualify a trial judge is legally sufficient when the alleged facts would create in a reasonably prudent person a well-founded fear of not receiving a fair and impartial trial.” Valdes-Fauli v. Valdes-Fauli, 903 So. 2d 214, 216 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). A review of the verified motion to disqualify demonstrates that it is legally sufficient to create in a reasonably prudent person a well-founded fear that they would not receive a fair hearing before the judge. See Tundidor v. State, 361 So. 3d 775, 778 (Fla. 2023) (“We conclude that the combination of certain circumstances contained in the allegations . . . would create in a reasonably prudent person a well-founded fear of not receiving a fair and impartial proceeding. . . . [namely] the hugging . . . in the court room while still wearing a robe [] at the conclusion of the . . . case, and the personal exchange . . . in which the judge commiserated with [the opposing party].”). Accordingly, we grant the petition. Petition granted.

Opinion text and original PDF from Florida Third District Court of Appeal · Source opinion

Ask Ella about this case

General legal information, not legal advice. Jurisio is not a law firm.