L-R: Matthew R. Feluren, Elizabeth C. Sardinas and David B. Levin of Baker Donelson. Courtesy photos Big Changes to the Fla. Rules of Civil Procedure: Here's What You Need to Know
Amended Rule 1.510 and new Rule 1.202 will go into effect on Jan. 1, 2025, and since the amendments were not published prior to adoption, interested persons will have 75 days from the date of the court's opinion to file comments with the court. These changes aim to enhance the efficiency and fairness of civil litigation across the state.
June 05, 2024 at 10:57 AM
5 minute read
Board of Contributors
The Florida Supreme Court, on its own motion, amended Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510 (summary judgment) and adopted the new Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.202 (conferral prior to filing motions) on Wednesday, May 23. Amended Rule 1.510 and new Rule 1.202 will go into effect on Jan. 1, 2025, and since the amendments were not published prior to adoption, interested persons will have 75 days from the date of the court's opinion to file comments with the court. These changes aim to enhance the efficiency and fairness of civil litigation across the state.
What Does This Mean for You?
The change to Rule 1.510 (summary judgment) deals with the timeframe within which a party opposing summary judgment must file its response. Currently, response deadlines are tied to the date for hearing on the movant's motion for summary judgment, with responses due 20 days prior to the scheduled hearing. Under amended Rule 1.510(c)(5), the nonmovant must serve a response that includes the nonmovant's supporting factual position, "no later than 60 days after service of the motion for summary judgment." The Supreme Court's opinion notes that this amendment "will help ensure adherence to the deadlines set forth in the case management orders required under Florida Rules of Civil Procedure," specifically Rules 1.200 and 1.201.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Conversation Catalyst: Transforming Professional Advancement Through Strategic Dialogue
5 minute read
SEC Whistleblower Program: What to Expect Under the Trump Administration
6 minute read
Turning the Shock of a January Marital Split Into Effective Strategies for Your Well-Being
5 minute read
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
