Legal Fight Over Fernandina Beach Recall Intensifies Ahead of March 31 Hearing

By Mike Lednovich/Editor

Nassau County Judge Marianne Aho Tuesday delayed a decision on whether to halt the recall effort targeting Fernandina Beach Commissioners Genece Minshew and Tim Poynter, instead rescheduling a key injunction hearing for next week after questions over legal service and timing dominated initial arguments.

At a hearing attorneys for both sides agreed to continue the matter to next Tuesday at 2 p.m., giving defendants time to formally accept service and prepare arguments on the merits of the case.

The hearing was originally set to consider the lawsuit filed by Minshew and Poynter seeks declaratory and injunctive relief to stop the recall effort, arguing deficiencies in the petitions and the process. The recall campaign, led by Gass and Recall FB 2026, has advanced following signature verification by the Supervisor of Elections.

However, the proceeding quickly shifted to procedural concerns after the commissioners’ attorney, Samuel Zeskin, acknowledged difficulty serving papers to recall committee chair Pat Gass.

Zeskin told the court that multiple attempts had been made to serve Gass at her residence and her son’s home, without success.  He argued the court could still proceed given “reasonable efforts” had been made.

Attorney James Bruner, representing Gass and the political committee Recall FB 2026, countered that due process required additional time and confirmed Gass had been out of state but had returned to Nassau County the night before the hearing.

After a brief recess, Bruner agreed to accept service on behalf of his client, clearing a key procedural hurdle and allowing the case to move forward on a revised schedule.

While Tuesday’s hearing did not address the substance of the recall challenge, attorneys previewed sharply different views on urgency and harm.

Bruner argued there is no “irreparable harm” justifying an injunction and emphasized the need for time to prepare a defense, noting legal precedent suggesting at least seven days’ notice for such hearings.

Zeskin, meanwhile, stressed the accelerating timeline of the recall process, telling the court “The clock is ticking” and urging a prompt resolution.

Attorneys for the Supervisor of Elections, Janet Adkins, also raised concerns about timing, warning that delays could interfere with election administration, including ballot preparation and overlapping petition verification for other candidates.

Judge Aho acknowledged those constraints but declined to expedite the hearing further, noting her newly open schedule and the need to balance preparation time with election deadlines.

Another flashpoint involved statutory deadlines tied to the recall process.

Under Florida law, elected officials subject to recall have a limited window — typically five business days after petition certification — to submit a 200-word defense statement that appears on the ballot.

Zeskin argued that deadline should be temporarily extended until after the injunction hearing, while Bruner objected, arguing such relief would improperly interfere with the statutory process and did not meet the legal standard for emergency action.

Judge Aho did not rule on that issue Tuesday but invited the commissioners’ legal team to file a separate motion, setting a potential case management hearing later this week to address the timing dispute.

Tuesday’s hearing also surfaced a secondary legal dispute over representation, with Bruner objecting to the involvement of attorneys paid by the City of Fernandina Beach, suggesting potential legal conflicts.  Zeskin responded by citing Florida Supreme Court precedent supporting such representation.

The rescheduled March 31 hearing is expected to focus squarely on whether the court should grant a preliminary injunction halting the recall process.

Judge Aho indicated the proceeding is likely to be a legal, rather than evidentiary, hearing centered on the sufficiency of the recall petitions themselves.

In the meantime, the recall process continues to move forward, with election officials balancing statutory timelines against the pending court challenge.