Morse v. Moxley, 97-114
| Decision Date | 07 March 1997 |
| Docket Number | No. 97-114,97-114 |
| Citation | 691 So.2d 504 |
| Parties | 22 Fla. L. Weekly D607 Hon. Maryanne MORSE, Circuit Court Clerk, etc., Petitioner, v. Hon. John Dean MOXLEY, Jr., Circuit Court Judge, etc., Respondent. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
H. Terrell Griffin of Griffin & Linder, P.A., Orlando, for Petitioner.
John Dean Moxley, Jr., Titusville, pro se.
The Clerk of the Circuit Court of Seminole County, Maryanne Morse, has petitioned this court to issue a writ of prohibition against John Dean Moxley, Jr., acting in his capacity as Chief Judge of the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit of Florida. The dispute arises from an administrative order issued by Moxley which provided:
IN RE: ASSIGNMENT OF TRIAL CLERKS (SEMINOLE COUNTY)
It has come to the attention of the Court that the Clerk of the Court in Seminole County has reassigned two trial clerks without notice to the judges to whom they had been assigned and that this reassignment is likely to result in disruption of court operations in the criminal division.
1. Effective immediately upon the execution of this order, trial clerks shall be assigned to judges as follows:
Circuit Judge Trial Clerk Assigned
Nancy F. Alley Adrienne Fordham
Seymour Benson Susan Staggs
Newman D. Brock Stacey Hartman
Alan A. Dickey Debra Johnson
O.H. Eaton, Jr. Lisa Reed
Thomas G. Freeman Dot Guess
Kenneth R. Lester, Jr. Linda Rubright
Gene R. Stephenson Sharonda Wynn
Leonard V. Wood June Butler
2. The Clerk of the Court shall not take any direct or indirect action to change the above assignments but shall assign additional trial clerks as needed to cover absences, arraignments, docket soundings or other proceedings which require more than one clerk.
3. This order shall be in effect for sixty days or until modified, whichever shall first occur.
In her petition Morse states that the order apparently was entered under color of section 43.26(2)(b), Florida Statutes, which provides that the presiding judge of a circuit has the power to assign clerks and bailiffs. On the other hand, Morse posits that the clerk is vested with constitutional authority by Article V, section 16 of the Florida Constitution and possesses statutory authority, pursuant to section 28.06, Florida Statutes, to appoint deputy clerks. Inherent in this latter authority, she insists, is the power to fire deputy clerks and assign them to the position deemed most appropriate by the clerk. Morse argues in her petition:
If the clerk does not have the power to control her deputies, promote them, fire them, discipline them and assign them, then she cannot properly run her office. Any attempt by the chief judge to usurp the powers inherent in the office of a constitutional officer is outside the jurisdiction of the court. To the extent that § 43.26(2)(b) Florida Statutes gives the Chief Judge the power to assign specific employees of the Clerk to any duty, the statute is unconstitutional.
* * *
The Chief Judge of the 18th Judicial Circuit has neither constitutional nor statutory authority to require the Clerk of the Circuit Court to provide certain personnel for certain duties. The assignment of deputy clerks must necessarily be left within the discretion of the elected Clerk of the Circuit Court. If the Chief Judge has the power to assign a specific deputy clerk to a specific judge, then it would follow that the Chief Judge has the power to assign the Clerk herself to any judicial duty that the Chief Judge sees fit. The Chief Judge could literally assign the Clerk to sit in a courtroom and assist a Circuit Judge during trial when, by constitutional mandate, the Clerk should be attending to her duties as ex officio clerk to the Board of County Commissioners, or as auditor or any one of the other duties that she has to assume upon taking the Office of Clerk of the Circuit Court.
Moxley responds that he acted under the authority of section 42.26, Florida Statutes, Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.050(b)(6), and Times Publishing Company v. Ake, 660 So.2d 255 (F...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
O'Donnell's Corp. v. Ambroise
...(Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Larcher v. Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, 736 So.2d 1249 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999); Morse v. Moxley, 691 So.2d 504 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). Prohibition is also inappropriate if the parties have the right to remedy the wrong by direct appeal. English; Broward County......
-
O'Donnell's Corporation v. Ambroise, Case No. 5D03-324 (Fla. App. 5th Dist. 11/7/2003)
...(Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Larcher v. Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, 736 So. 2d 1249 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999); Morse v. Moxley, 691 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). Prohibition is also inappropriate if the parties have the right to remedy the wrong by direct appeal. English; Broward Coun......
-
DCFS v. JC
...lower court acted in excess of its jurisdiction." Hudson v. Hoffmann, 471 So.2d 117, 118 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); see also Morse v. Moxley, 691 So.2d 504 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Dep't of Juvenile Justice v. Soud, 685 So.2d 1376 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). Moreover, I do not perceive anything in this recor......
- Mays v. State