final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Petition for Writ of Certiorari from the Circuit Court for
Miami-Dade County, Lower Tribunal No. 16-16680 Jose M.
Farrell Patel Jomarron & Lopez, PLLC., Robin F. Hazel,
and Jesmany Jomarron, for petitioners.
Law, Gonzalo R. Dorta, and Matias R. Dorta, for respondent.
SALTER, MILLER, and GORDO, JJ.
Oscar Farach, Jesmany Jomarron, and Jomarron Lopez, PLLC,
seek certiorari relief from the denial of their motion to
unseal the criminal arrest record of respondent, Marcus
Rivero, in a pending defamation lawsuit. Petitioners contend
the arrest record is integral to a vital defense, that of
"truth." We conclude that petitioners have failed
to demonstrate material injury, irremediable on appeal,
hence, we dismiss the petition.
August 4, 2015, Rivero was arrested in Miami-Dade County for
trafficking in certain controlled substances. In early 2016,
an anonymous blogger posted the following content on the
[Rivero] is a regular douche bag in the Miami area who thinks
because he has been mentioned in a few TMZ articles and he
thinks he's hot sh*t. Please put this fool in his place.
He uses his shoe business as a disguise for selling drugs as
you can see in his arrest.
two months after the post appeared, Rivero obtained an order
sealing his criminal court record, pursuant to section
943.059, Florida Statutes (2019). He then commenced a
defamation lawsuit against the unknown blogger, identified at
that time only as "John Doe." After conducting
further investigation, Rivero amended his complaint to name
Farach as the offending author.
retained Jomarron and the law firm of Jomarron Lopez, PLLC to
represent him. Pursuant to the representation, Jomarron and
the firm sent a "litigation hold" letter to
Rivero's mother. Affixed to the correspondence was a copy
of the blog post. Rivero then added Jomarron and the firm as
defendants in the defamation suit, contending the disclosure
of the blog post in conjunction with the litigation hold
letter was tortious. Several iterations of the complaint and
corresponding responsive pleadings followed, but suffice it
to say, all respondents eventually asserted truth as an
conducting preliminary discovery, petitioners moved in the
trial court to unseal respondent's arrest record,
asserting the information contained therein was relevant and
material to their theory of defense. The lower tribunal
denied the motion. The instant petition ensued.