Wade Clark Mulcahy LLP

<p style="text-align: justify;">Florida’s Supreme Court recently adopted the federal summary judgment standard. Since then, lawyers and the trial and appellate courts have grappled with the twists and turns every major rule change presents.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Prior to adoption of the new rule, summary judgment orders were reviewed de novo, and the trial court’s reasoning was irrelevant on appellate review.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Recently, Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal, in <em><a href="https://www.wcmlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Mech.pdf">Mech</a> v. Brazilian Waxing by Sisters, Inc</em>., Case Number 4D22-145, 2022 Fla. App. LEXIS 7444, 2022 WL 16626039 (Fla. 4th DCA November 2, 2022), found that the standard of review under the new summary judgment rule was de novo; that the new rule required that the trial court state on the record its reasoning in granting or denying summary judgment; and, that the trial court’s failure to state its reasoning on the record required reversal.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">While it is now clear that the trial court’s failure to state its reasoning on the record when ruling on summary judgment is per se reversible error, the standard of review to be applied is unclear. If the standard of review is de novo, the appellate court need not consider the trial court’s reasoning, and there is no need to know its reasoning. If the standard of review is abuse of discretion, the trial court’s reasoning is important to, and an intricate part of, appellate review. The same is true if the summary judgment order is reviewed under the substantial competent evidence rule.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">As often happens, resolution of one issue has exposed another. In holding that the trial court’s failure to state its reasoning on the record when ruling on summary judgment is per se reversible error, the Fourth District has cast uncertainty upon the standard of review to be applied in appeals from summary judgment orders.</p>
One thing is certain; the prevailing party on summary judgment must make sure that the court announces, on the record, its reasoning. Failure to do so is per se reversible error.

Thanks to Charles "Chip" George for this post. Please contact <a href="mailto:Cgeorge@wcmlaw.com">Chip</a> with any questions.