Pearson v. Pearson

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an ex parte communication alone is legally sufficient to require recusal
• holding that an ex parte communication alone is legally sufficient to require recusal
• trial judge interviewed the child in chambers with the mother present and neither father nor counsel were present
• trial judge interviewed the child in chambers with the mother present and neither father nor counsel were present
• “It is because of its effect on the 5 appearance of impartiality that an allegation of an ex parte communication is legally sufficient to require recusal.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY v. SAUNDRA ALONSO, as Personal Representative of the ESTATE OF FRANCIS ALONSO
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2019-02-06· cited 3×
• B.D., the Mother v. Department of Children and Families
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2025-02-26

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Rose v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1992-05-28· cited 60×
• Brake v. Murphy
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1997-05-07· cited 19×
• Rollins v. Baker
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1996-12-13· cited 10×
• Robbins v. Robbins
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1999-08-27· cited 5×