Florida Judge Disqualified After Facebook-Friending a Litigant

A Florida judge has been directed to recuse herself by an fbappellate court after the judge sent a Facebook-friend request to a party during divorce proceedings.

Specifically, Judge Linda D. Schoonover was presiding over a divorce and, prior to entry of a final judgment, sent a Facebook-friend request to the wife.  Upon advice of counsel, the wife declined to respond.  “Thereafter, the trial court entered a final judgment of dissolution, allegedly attributing most of the marital debt to Petitioner and providing Respondent with a disproportionately excessive alimony award.”  The trial judge denied a motion to disqualify.  A writ was taken and the appellate court reversed.

The Fifth District held, in Sandra Chase v. Robert Loisel, Jr., that:

“[i]t seems clear that a judge’s ex parte communication with a party presents a legally sufficient claim for disqualification, particularly in the case where the party’s failure to respond to a Facebook ‘friend’ request creates a reasonable fear of offending the solicitor. The ‘friend’ request placed the litigant between the proverbial rock and a hard place: either engage in improper ex parte communications with the judge presiding over the case or risk offending the judge by not accepting the ‘friend’ request.”

Interestingly, the Fifth DCA took issue with the Fourth District’s decision in State of Florida v. Domville that a judge’s Facebook “friendship” with an attorney was also grounds for recusal:

“We have serious reservations about the court’s rationale in Domville. The word ‘friend’ on Facebook is a term of art. A number of words or phrases could more aptly describe the concept, including acquaintance and, sometimes, virtual stranger. A Facebook friendship does not necessarily signify the existence of a close relationship. Other than the public nature of the internet, there is no difference between a Facebook ‘friend’ and any other friendship a judge might have. Domville‘s logic would require disqualification in cases involving an acquaintance of a judge. Particularly in smaller counties, where everyone in the legal community knows each other, this requirement is unworkable and unnecessary. Requiring disqualification in such cases does not reflect the true nature of a Facebook friendship and casts a large net in an effort to catch a minnow.”

In Florida, there is a Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee opinion on judges and Facebook as well as another opinion about judicial assistants and Facebook.

 

1st Amendment
Three Steps to Understanding Why Government Officials Cannot Block Users on Social Media (Knight First Amendment Institute et al. v. Donald J. Trump et al.)

There is some confusion about the recent Second Circuit opinion as to how, on a private social media platform, a government official, using a personal account, cannot block other users. The following three step process should lead just about everyone to understand the outcome. The case is Knight First Amendment …

Internet
When You See People Trying to Sue a Social Media Platform Because Their Account Was Suspended, It’s a Stunt (lessons of the CDA & Brittain v. Twitter)

A number of politicians, activists, and others who feel aggrieved after their Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and/or YouTube content has been removed or their accounts suspended have taken to the courts to sue the social media platforms with claims that they are being singled out, muzzled, or their free speech is …

Injunction
Casual Sexual Relationships and Florida’s Injunction Against Dating Violence (versus other injunctions)

When seeking an injunction in Florida to prevent someone from contacting you, pay careful attention to which statute best applies. This is the (unfortunate) lesson of Tyler Sumners v. Lindsey Thompson. After meeting on Craigslist, the parties had a four year consensual sexual relationship punctuated by periods of time when …