The Florida Supreme Court will not decide whether the Broward County Clerk of Courts is constitutionally underfunded, having rejected jurisdiction in a case that challenged the Florida Department of Revenue and the Florida Department of Financial Services' distribution methods.

Forman's ex-husband and predecessor Howard Forman filed the suit in May 2016, alleging that a system the state implemented to divert millions in court-filing fees meant the clerk's office wasn't provided with enough money to meet its constitutional standards. The lawsuit alleged that was a violation of article V, section 14(b) of the Florida Constitution, which governs funding for the clerks of circuit and county courts.

The clerk of court is responsible for collecting money and keeping records. Without an increase in funding, it might have to lay off employees and cut office hours, which could slow administrative services for Broward's courts.

In a press release, Forman said she is "deeply committed to public service and the fulfillment of the hundreds of statutory duties that support the justice system and serve Broward County."

"In continuing her advocacy, Clerk Forman was hopeful that the Florida Supreme Court would accept jurisdiction and review the issue of the Broward County Clerk of Courts' funding as a matter of great public importance," the statement said.

Forman pointed to a ruling from Leon Circuit County Judge Karen Gievers in 2018, which found the state shouldn't direct money away from the Broward County clerk's office until it had established "a constitutionally proper appropriations process."

Gievers' ruling noted that the Broward County Clerk's office had experienced a decline in funding since 2012 while expenses increased. It laid off 18 temporary employees in 2014 and 15 court employees in 2015 because of budgetary constraints.

But the First District Court of Appeal dismissed the lawsuit in May, ruling that Forman hadn't presented enough evidence that an alleged lack of funding stopped her office from meeting its constitutional duties or impeded on litigants' rights.

"At most, the clerk proved her office was operationally underfunded," the First DCA ruled.

|

Related story: State Appeals Court Rejects Arguments on Clerk Funding

Though the case appears to have ended, Forman said she hopes the Florida Legislature will take note of the First DCA's finding that her office was chronically underfunded. She hopes lawmakers and will work with clerks across the state to fix the problem.

"Broward County residents deserve adequate funding to ensure quality services," Forman's statement said.

Tallahassee attorneys Mark Herron and Albert Gimbel of Messer Caparello, and Melanie Leitman of Stearns Weaver Miller represent Forman. They had argued that the Florida Supreme Court had discretionary jurisdiction because the case involves a provision of the state Constitution, touches on the validity of several state statutes and affects a class of constitutional or state officers.

The state had argued Forman's lawsuit mischaracterized the statute at issue, which says funding for Florida clerks "shall be provided by adequate and appropriate filing fees for judicial proceedings and service charges and costs for performing court-related functions." That, the defendant argued, didn't mean filing fees should be exclusively used to fund the clerk's office.

The Department of Financial Services said it agrees with the First DCA's ruling. General counsel to the Department of Revenue Mark Hamilton did not respond to requests for comment by deadline.

The high court said it will not accept any motions for rehearing.

Read more: