English v. McCrary
348 So. 2d 293 (1977)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A writ of prohibition is an extraordinary remedy that may only be used to prevent a lower court from acting without jurisdiction or in excess of its jurisdiction, not to correct an erroneous exercise of jurisdiction or a potential abuse of discretion.
Facts:
- Harry Morrison, the duly elected State Attorney for the Second Judicial Circuit, was a party in a dissolution of marriage proceeding with his wife, Estelle Morrison.
- The case was before Judge Robert L. McCrary, Jr.
- Carey English, a reporter for the Tallahassee Democrat, attempted to attend a hearing in the Morrisons' dissolution proceeding.
- Judge McCrary refused to permit English to attend the hearing.
- The reason given for the exclusion was the desire of the litigants to conduct a private hearing, with the judge considering the matter to be private.
Procedural Posture:
- Carey English filed a petition for a writ of prohibition with the District Court of Appeal, First District, seeking to compel Judge Robert L. McCrary, Jr., to open a dissolution hearing.
- The District Court of Appeal denied the petition, concluding that it failed to state a prima facie case for the extraordinary writ.
- The Supreme Court of Florida granted a writ of certiorari to review the District Court of Appeal's decision because it conflicted with a decision from another district, State ex rel. Gore Newspapers Co. v. Tyson.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a writ of prohibition lie to review a trial court's order excluding the press from a dissolution of marriage proceeding?
Opinions:
Majority - Karl, J.
No. A writ of prohibition is not the proper remedy to challenge a trial court's order closing a proceeding when the court has jurisdiction over the case. Prohibition is a preventive, not corrective, writ that only applies when a lower court is about to act entirely without jurisdiction or in excess of its jurisdiction. A circuit court has clear jurisdiction over dissolution of marriage proceedings. Therefore, the decision to close the courtroom, even if it were an abuse of discretion or an erroneous exercise of that jurisdiction, does not constitute an act in excess of jurisdiction. The writ cannot be used to usurp the function of an appeal or to correct errors made by a tribunal acting within its proper authority.
Dissenting - England, J.
Yes. The writ of prohibition should be available as a remedy for the denial of public and press access to judicial proceedings. The majority's adherence to the narrow, historical basis for the writ ignores the modern societal need for rapid appellate review of such crucial issues. The Florida Constitution provides that 'no cause shall be dismissed because an improper remedy has been sought,' which should compel the court to treat the petition as the proper vehicle to address the underlying constitutional issue of access. To deny a judicial forum on purely technical grounds abdicates the court's responsibility to ensure courts remain open, especially when there is no other adequate and speedy remedy available for a non-party like a reporter.
Analysis:
This decision narrowly construes the writ of prohibition, reinforcing the strict traditional distinction between a lack of jurisdiction and an erroneous exercise of it. By holding that closing a courtroom is, at most, a correctable error rather than an act exceeding jurisdiction, the court effectively removed the fastest procedural tool the press had to challenge such closures. The ruling places a significant procedural hurdle before non-parties seeking immediate review of courtroom access orders, forcing them to find other, potentially slower, avenues for relief. The dissent's position highlights the tension between rigid procedural formalism and the modern demand for flexible remedies to protect fundamental rights like public access to the judiciary.
Unlock the full brief for English v. McCrary