Florida Supreme Court Adopts Amendments to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure

The Florida Supreme Court (Court), on its own motion, adopted amendments to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure (Rules) earlier this year. Interested persons were given time to file comments and, upon consideration of those comments, the Court adopted further amendments to the Rules, as detailed in two orders issued on Dec. 5, 2024. The amendments, which will take effect on Jan. 1, 2025, primarily address case management, conferral requirements, discovery obligations and sanctions, and summary judgment motions. The key changes are summarized below.

Case Management

The Court adopted various amendments earlier this year in an effort to "create[] a framework for the active case management of civil cases with a focus on adhering to deadlines established early based on the complexity of the case, while providing room for customization by judicial circuit." To this point, the Court further amended Rule 1.200, which governs pretrial procedure and, more specifically, case management. The amended rule provides that the "court must issue the case management order no later than 120 days after commencement of the action" and includes a list of deadlines that are required to be included in case management orders. Deadlines for the filing and service of motions for summary judgment, filing of objections to pleadings and filing of pretrial motions are now included on the deadline list in the amended rule. Additionally, pursuant to the amended rule, the deadlines identified in the order are strictly enforced unless changed by court order.

Rule 1.200 also governs case management conferences. The Court amended the rule to allow parties to agree to address motions for summary judgment and motions requiring evidentiary hearings to be heard as part of a case management conference, which was previously not allowed under the rule.

Rule 1.201, which governs complex litigation, was also amended. The Court removed language that provided that "[a] case will be designated or redesignated as complex in accordance with rule 1.200." The Court also added language "to clarify that, while rule 1.202 requires conferral before a motion is filed, rule 1.201(c)(4) is intended to require a conferral closer to the hearing date to ensure that the reserved hearing time is still necessary." Additionally, the rule now requires that a "case management order … be consistent with the time standard in Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.250(a)(1)(B) for the completion of complex cases."

Finally, the Court amended Rule 1.090 to exempt trial continuances and extensions of deadlines in case management orders from the general extension of time provisions under that rule. The amendment provides that "[e]xtensions of deadlines in case management orders are governed by rule 1.200 or rule 1.201, and trial continuances are governed by rule 1.460."

Case management orders already in effect on Jan. 1, 2025, continue to govern pending actions, but any extensions of deadlines specified in those existing case management orders are governed by amended Rule 1.200 or amended Rule 1.201. For actions commenced before Jan. 1, 2025, and in which the court has not issued a case management order by that date, a case management order must be issued by April 4, 2025.

Conferral Requirements

The Court also amended Rule 1.202, which governs conferral prior to filing motions. The Court expanded the motions that are exempt from the duty to confer. Under the amended rule, conferral is not required prior to filing motions: 1) for time to extend service of initial process, 2) for default, 3) for injunctive relief, 4) for judgment on the pleadings, 5) for summary judgment, 6) to dismiss for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted, 7) to permit maintenance of a class action, 8) to involuntarily dismiss an action, 9) to dismiss for failure to prosecute, 10) for directed verdict and motions filed under Rule 1.530, 11) for garnishment, attachment or other motions to enforce a judgment under Rule 1.570, 12) for writ of possession under Rule 1.580, 13) filed in actions proceeding under Section 51.011, Florida Statutes and 14) that do not require notice to the other party under statute or rule. Additionally, conferral is not required when the movant or the nonmovant is unrepresented by counsel.

Under the amended rule, at the end of the motion and above the signature block, the movant must include a certificate of conferral. In the required certificate of conferral form, the Court added an option for certifying that conferral is not required under the rule.

The amendments also allow for sanctions under Rule 1.202. Specifically, the amended rule provides that "[f]ailure to comply with the requirements of this rule may result in sanctions, including denial of a motion without prejudice. The purposeful evasion of communication under the rule may result in an appropriate sanction." Therefore, practitioners and litigants should familiarize themselves with the amended rule and ensure they are in compliance before filing a motion.

Discovery

The Court, along with the other amendments adopted earlier this year, also "incorporated the proportionality language of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) into the Florida rules and required initial discovery disclosures [to be made within 60 days after service of the complaint or joinder] and discovery supplementation like the federal rules." The Court adopted further amendments addressing discovery and, more specifically, proportionality. Importantly, a commentary was added to Rule 1.280 "to explain that the Court has adopted almost all the text of federal rule 26(b)(1) and that [Rule 1.280] is 'to be construed and applied in accordance with the federal proportionality standard.'" The Court also amended Rule 1.340, which governs interrogatories, and Rule 1.350, which governs production of documents, to require that grounds for objecting on that basis be provided "with specificity," "including the reasons." Furthermore, under amended Rule 1.340, "[a]ny ground not stated in a timely objection is waived unless the court, for good cause, excuses the failure." Finally, a commentary was added to Rule 1.340 to explain that "[a]ny use of standard interrogatories must be adjusted for proportional discovery." The Court is referring the possible revisions of the standard interrogatories to a Florida Bar committee.

In addition to the amendments related to proportionality, Rule 1.350 was further amended to require that "[a]n objection … state whether any responsive materials are being withheld on the basis of that objection." The Court explained that this amendment "should eliminate resources being needlessly wasted on objections where no materials are being withheld." Furthermore, under the amended rule, "[a]n objection to part of a request must specify the part and permit inspection of the rest." According to the Court, "[t]his addition should help discovery progress when there is only an objection to part of a request."

The amendments also "address the lack of coordination between the timing of initial discovery disclosures and the timing of the first set of discovery requests[.]" Specifically, amended Rule 1.280 states that "[a] party may not seek discovery from any sources before that party's initial disclosure obligations are satisfied, except when authorized by these rules, by stipulation, or by court order."

Finally, the Court adopted further amendments "to provide an enforcement mechanism for the initial discovery disclosure and supplemental discovery obligations that the Court added in [R]ule 1.280 … [and to] detail the sanctions available when a party fails to disclose or to supplement an earlier response." Amended Rule 1.280 requires that appropriate sanctions be imposed when a certification violates the rule without substantial justification, which the Court explains "will make the certification requirement more meaningful and hopefully more effective in eliminating noncompliant discovery." Similarly, Rule 1.380 allows a party to move to compel disclosure and for appropriate sanctions when a party fails to make a disclosure required by Rule 1.280(a) and to move for an order compelling a response if a party fails to produce as required under Rule 1.350(b). Additionally, amended Rule 1.380 provides that, "[i]f a party fails to provide information or identify a witness as required by rule 1.280(a) or (g), the party is not allowed to use that information or witness to supply evidence … unless the failure was substantially justified or is harmless." In addition to or instead of this sanction, the court, on motion and after providing an opportunity to be heard, may 1) order payment of fees and costs, 2) inform the jury of the party's failure and 3) impose other appropriate sanctions. These sanctions are severe, so practitioners should take care to ensure they are complying with the rules governing discovery.

Summary Judgment

Earlier this year, Rule 1.510, which governs summary judgment, was amended to tie the deadline for responding to a motion for summary judgment to the service date of the motion rather than to the hearing date. The rule has now been further amended to provide that a motion for summary judgment must be filed and served "consistent with any court-ordered deadlines," and a response must be served "[n]o later than 40 days after service of the motion for summary judgment."

Additionally, in order to provide parties and courts with adequate time to prepare for summary judgment hearings, the Court amended the rule to require that a hearing on a motion for summary judgment "be set for a date at least 10 days after the deadline for serving a response, unless the parties stipulate or the court orders otherwise."

The amendments are effective Jan. 1, 2025, at 12:01 a.m., and apply to all cases pending at that time, except that the requirements of Rule 1.280(a) (Initial Discovery Disclosures) will not apply to any action commenced before the effective date. Practitioners and litigants should familiarize themselves with the changes and, to the extent they are applicable, be prepared to implement them at the start of the new year.

Information contained in this alert is for the general education and knowledge of our readers. It is not designed to be, and should not be used as, the sole source of information when analyzing and resolving a legal problem, and it should not be substituted for legal advice, which relies on a specific factual analysis. Moreover, the laws of each jurisdiction are different and are constantly changing. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. If you have specific questions regarding a particular fact situation, we urge you to consult the authors of this publication, your Holland & Knight representative or other competent legal counsel.