Elizabeth Coursen v. Robert P. Watrous Chartered
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledJuly 15, 2022
Docket2D21-2426
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
ELIZABETH COURSEN,
Petitioner,
v.
ROBERT P. WATROUS CHARTERED,
Respondent.
No. 2D21-2426
July 15, 2022
Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the County Court for Sarasota
County; Erika Quartermaine, Judge.
Elizabeth Coursen, pro se.
Robert P. Watrous, pro se.
ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, Judge.
Elizabeth Coursen petitions for a writ of certiorari quashing
the trial court's order denying her motion for a jury trial or for a
writ of mandamus directing the trial court to conduct a jury trial in
this small claims matter. Coursen filed a written motion for a jury
trial well before the February 23, 2021, pretrial conference, and the
minutes of that pretrial conference note the existence of multiple
"pending motions," which presumably included that motion as it
was indeed still pending. But the trial court judge, who was not at
the pretrial conference,1 subsequently denied the motion, stating
that the record did not support the "disputed fact" that Coursen
had made the requisite demand for a jury trial under Florida Small
Claims Rules 7.150.2
Having ordered oral argument in the hopes of gaining greater
insight into the trial court's reasoning, we were instead left with a
disturbing lack of clarity regarding the proceedings below.
Nonetheless, we are compelled to dismiss Coursen's petition for lack
of jurisdiction without resolving the jury-demand issue on the
merits. See Jaye v. Royal Saxon, Inc., 720 So. 2d 214, 214–15 (Fla.
1998) (holding that certiorari review of an order striking a jury
demand is inappropriate because such an order does not cause
1 The pretrial conference was conducted by the court
administrator, which Watrous indicated is common practice in the
Twelfth Judicial Circuit.
2 Rule 7.150 states that a defendant may demand a jury trial
"within 10 days after service of the summons/notice to appear or at
the pretrial conference, if any." (Emphasis added.)
2
irreparable injury that cannot be remedied on direct appeal);
Ruffenach v. Ocwen Loan Servs., LLC, 257 So. 3d 541, 542 (Fla. 5th
DCA 2018) (explaining that a lower court's decision to strike the
request for a jury trial "is a non-appealable, non-final order not
subject to mandamus review"). We emphasize, however, that this
dismissal is without prejudice to Coursen's right to raise the denial
of her motion for a jury trial, if necessary, on direct appeal.
Petition dismissed.
KELLY and LUCAS, JJ., Concur.
Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
3