Miami, FL — A storm of controversy has erupted in Miami Dade’s Eleventh Judicial Circuit after Circuit Judge Mavel Ruiz issued a summary judgment that litigants and legal observers say deprived self represented plaintiffs of their most basic constitutional rights.
The case, Shitta Bey et al. v. Joseph Durandis et al. (Case No. 2021 009833 CA 01), had been pending for nearly three years under a prior judge and was repeatedly set for jury trial.
But after Judge Ruiz assumed the case, she abruptly withdrew it from the trial track and entered a ruling in favor of the defendants. Plaintiffs argue the decision was reached without proper notice of hearing, without opportunity to be heard, and in disregard of their evidence.
Court records reveal that the judgment went further, misrepresenting that it was entered after “argument of counsel,” despite Judge Ruiz’s full knowledge that plaintiffs were representing themselves. Legal analysts note that under Florida law, a judgment entered without notice is void ab initio — a nullity from inception.
Compounding the controversy, plaintiffs allege that Judge Ruiz accepted exhibits privately transmitted by opposing counsel through the court’s electronic system, then introduced those materials in an unannounced hearing. Plaintiffs say they were ambushed — compelled to respond on the spot to ex parte materials despite having received no notice that their claims were at issue that day.
Equally troubling to critics, Judge Ruiz later suggested that key claims were “better evaluated” by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), a private accreditor that explicitly disclaims any adjudicatory authority. By directing claims away from the courtroom and into the hands of a non-judicial body, observers argue, the judge effectively abandoned her constitutional duty to provide access to courts.
“These actions deprived the plaintiffs of due process, access to the courts, and their inviolate right to a jury trial,” said one legal analyst following the case. “No Florida judge may outsource judicial responsibility to a private accreditor, much less proceed with summary judgment absent notice.”
The plaintiffs’ motion to vacate the judgment, filed under Rule 1.540(b)(4), remains pending.
Yet critics say the refusal to vacate a jurisdictionally void order not only compounds the injustice but also undermines public trust in judicial independence and impartiality.
The allegations raise profound constitutional and ethical concerns. Article I of the Florida Constitution guarantees due process, access to courts, and the right to a jury trial, while the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct requires judges to uphold integrity, avoid ex parte communications, and remain faithful to the law. Plaintiffs contend Judge Ruiz’s actions violated each of these mandates.
There is an urgent need for the Judicial Qualifications Commission and The Florida Bar to investigate these issues, as they implicate not only the rights of the litigants but also public confidence in the judiciary.
Key Allegations at a Glance:
• No Notice of Hearing: Judge Ruiz entered summary judgment without notifying the prose plaintiffs, a move Florida law deems void ab initio.
• Misrepresentation of Record: Judgment falsely stated it followed “argument of counsel,” though plaintiffs were self represented.
• Ex Parte Exhibits: Opposing counsel admitted to privately transmitting exhibits to the judge, later used in an ambush hearing.
• Right to Jury Denied: Case had been set for jury trial multiple times; Judge Ruiz unilaterally withdrew it from the trial track.
• Abdication to Private Entity: Judge directed claims to ACGME, a non judicial accreditor with no authority to decide disputes.
Case Reference:
Shitta-Bey et al. v. Joseph Durandis et al.
Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Miami-Dade County
Case No. 2021-009833-CA-01
Direct Case Link:
https://www2.miami-dadeclerk.gov/ovv/CaseNoSearch.aspx?CaseNum=2021-009833-CA-01
Appeal Court Case Number:
3D2024-0949
https://acis.flcourts.gov/portal/court/8a73be7f-864b-42a9-b8ad 1ec0a3e890b4/case/8ff66880-0096-4f44-922f-281fee3a454a
