In Gus v. 3217 Corinne LLC, 50 Fla. L. Weekly D1567 (Fla. 5th DCA 2025), the Fifth District Court of Appeal issued a strong rebuke of what it saw as improper discovery strategy masquerading as a valid procedural vehicle — the pure bill of discovery.
The plaintiff brought a stand-alone action called a pure bill of discovery — a historically available but highly disfavored equitable tool. Inside the action, the plaintiff additionally sought to elicit discovery responses, seeking the information that they sued to get. The trial court permitted the plaintiff’s discovery requests. But the Fifth DCA reversed, warning that the trial court had set the cart before the horse and effectively handed the plaintiff a victory without adjudicating the underlying dispute.
The appellate court analogized the error to granting discovery in an accounting action without first proving entitlement to it — noting that such a shortcut creates an unfair and automatic disadvantage to the responding party. It further observed that the trial court’s approach improperly “let the cat out of the bag” — a vivid illustration of the irreversible consequences of pretextual discovery.
The message was clear: you can’t bypass litigation requirements by means of normal discovery tools. And while a pure bill of discovery remains technically viable in Florida law, courts are highly skeptical of its use — and litigators relying on it should expect close scrutiny.
Takeaway: Use extreme caution when circumstances call for a pure bill of discovery. Unless truly equitable, narrowly tailored, and procedurally appropriate, courts are likely to view it with suspicion and limit its effects when deployed as an impermissible end-run around substantive litigation.
* * * * * * * * * *
THIS BLOG IS INTENDED FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY. IT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE. THE READER SHOULD CONSULT WITH KNOWLEDGEABLE LEGAL COUNSEL TO DETERMINE HOW APPLICABLE LAWS APPLY TO SPECIFIC FACTS AND SITUATIONS. BLOG POSTS ARE BASED ON THE MOST CURRENT INFORMATION AT THE TIME THEY ARE WRITTEN. SINCE IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE LAWS OR OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES MAY HAVE CHANGED SINCE PUBLICATION, PLEASE CALL US TO DISCUSS ANY ACTION YOU MAY BE CONSIDERING AS A RESULT OF READING THIS BLOG.
