On May 23, 2024, on its own motion, the Florida Supreme Court modified Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510, which governs summary judgment, and adopted the new Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.202, which requires a movant to confer prior to filing non-dispositive motions. A copy of the Court’s opinion can be found here. These rules will be effective January 1, 2025.

Previously, deadlines for opposition to summary judgment were measured from the hearing date on the motion. However, the scarcity of hearing dates often resulted in the delay in the adjudication of summary judgment motions and caused the litigants to miss deadlines set forth in the case management orders required under Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.200 (Case Management; Pretrial Procedure) and 1.201 (Complex Litigation), as amended in SC2023-0962.

Under the amended summary judgment rule, the non-moving party must serve its response within 60 days of the service of the motion for summary judgment. The present rule required service at least 20 days before the time fixed for the hearing.

New Rule 1.202 (Conferral Prior to Filing Motions), provides:

(a) Duty. Before filing a motion, except for a motion for injunctive relief, for judgment on the pleadings, for summary
judgment, to dismiss or to permit maintenance of a class action, to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted,
or to involuntarily dismiss an action, the movant must confer with the opposing party in a good-faith effort to resolve the issues raised
in the motion.
(b) Certificate of Conferral. When conferral is required, the movant must file with the motion a certificate of conferral that must
be substantially in the following form:
“I certify that prior to filing this motion, I discussed the relief requested in this motion by [method of communication and date]
with the opposing party and [the opposing party (agrees or disagrees) on the resolution of all or part of the motion] OR [the
opposing party did not respond (describing with particularity all of the efforts undertaken to accomplish dialogue with the opposing
party prior to filing the motion)].

The obligation to meet and confer prior to filing a variety is motions is already required under the Local Rules for the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Rule 7.1(a)(3), and in certain complex business litigation (“CBL”) divisions, e.g. 11th Judicial Circuit for Florida (“CBL Division Judges require compliance with the Mandatory Order to Confer, and the filing of a Certificate of Conferral shall be provided with each motion. Conferral requires an actual discussion between attorneys, not between staff members. Attorneys must discuss in person or on the telephone.”)

The 11th Judicial Circuit CBL has provided useful guidelines for what constitutes a bona fide effort to meet and confer, stating:

The term “confer” requires a substantive conversation, in person or by telephone,
in a good faith effort to resolve the motion without court action and does not envision
written exchange of ultimatums. Counsel who merely attempt to confer have not
conferred. An unanswered phone call or email is not a conferral. Counsel shall respond
promptly to inquiries and communications from opposing counsel. The Court may sua
sponte deny motions that fail to include an appropriate and complete Certificate under
this section
.

The failure to meaningfully meet and confer and document the efforts in a certification contained in or accompanying a motion may result in the summary denial of the motion. Where it might be futile to meet and confer, the movant should explain its reasoning in the certification and ask the Court to be relieved from the obligation.

One Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *