GSS v. 3217 Corrine LLC, 50 Fla. L. Weekly D1567 (Fla. 6th DCA July 18, 2025):

The plaintiff petitioned the court for writ of certiorari, to quash the trial court’s order compelling her responses to respondent’s pretrial discovery request before the lower court determined the merits of the respondent’s pure bill of discovery action in the first place.

In the specific context of a pure bill of discovery, the trial court’s discovery order put the proverbial cart before the horse, and the order was akin to cat out of the bag discovery that can cause irreparable harm.

In a pure bill of discovery action, pretrial discovery is premature when identical to the discovery sought by the action. The broad discovery provisions of the rules of civil procedure which apply to all actions of a civil nature under Rule 1.010, do not compel a different conclusion. Under the scope limitations to the rules, discovery must be relevant to any party’s claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case.

The discovery the respondents sought under the rules was the same discovery they ultimately sought by their pure bill of discovery action and thus was not relevant to any claim until the respondents prevailed on the merits of their action for the discovery.