MARY LIZZIE HILLMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Mary Lizzie Hillman appealed a trial court order denying her affirmative defense and sought to proceed as an indigent without paying appellate filing fees. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's denial, holding that Section 57.081, Florida Statute applies only to trial court proceedings and that no statute authorizes indigent civil appellants to proceed without payment of appellate filing fees.
Section 57.081, Florida Statute applies only to trial court proceedings, not to appellate proceedings. No statute authorizes indigent persons involved in civil proceedings to proceed with appellate review without payment of the required filing fee. Accordingly, the trial court properly denied Hillman's motion, and Hillman must pay the appellate filing fee within 10 days or her appeal will be dismissed.
[1] A statute permitting a party to proceed without prepayment of costs applies only to proceedings in trial courts.
[2] Appellate review in a civil proceeding requires payment of the filing fee unless specifically authorized by the Legislature.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“As we construe Section 57.081, Florida Statute (1977), it applies only to proceedings in trial courts. A person may not seek appellate review in a civil proceeding without payment of the filing fee required by law unless specifically authorized to do so by the Legislature.”
Establishes the court's statutory interpretation that the insolvency statute does not extend to appellate proceedings and that civil appellants must pay filing fees unless specifically authorized by statute.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHillman, represented by Florida Rural Legal Services, Inc., filed a notice of appeal to challenge a final order denying her affirmative defense. She t…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
DOWNEY, Chief Judge.
ON MOTION
Appellant, represented by Florida Rural Legal Services, Inc., filed a notice of appeal to review “a final order denying her affirmative defense.” Thereafter, appellant filed an affidavit of insolvency in the trial court pursuant to Section 57.081, Florida Statute (1977), and moved the trial court for an order allowing appellant to proceed without prepayment of costs, relying upon Florida Appellate Rule 9.430. On July 3, 1979, the trial court denied that motion because this court, on June 21, 1979, entered an order, after receipt of the foregoing notice of appeal, directing appellant to pay the filing fee required by law or suffer dismissal of the appeal. The trial judge thus concluded he did not have “jurisdiction” to grant the motion.
We now have for consideration appellant’s motion “to vacate the order of the lower tribunal dated July 3,1979 and direct the trial court to consider said motion on its merits.” Appellant asks this court to stay the effect of its order of June 21, 1979, pending resolution of her right to proceed as an indigent.
As we construe Section 57.081, Florida Statute (1977), it applies only to proceedings in trial courts. A person may not seek appellate review in a civil proceeding without payment of the filing fee required by law unless specifically authorized to do so by the Legislature. Such authorization has been granted in criminal cases.1 However, we are unaware of any statute extending that privilege to indigent persons involved in civil proceedings.
Accordingly, in any event, appellant was not entitled to the order she sought from the trial court allowing her to proceed with her appeal without prepayment of a filing fee. In particular, she was not entitled to such an order in the face of our order of June 21, 1979, directing appellant to pay the filing fee or suffer dismissal of the appeal.
In view of the foregoing, appellant’s motions filed in this cause July 10, 1979, are denied and appellant shall have 10 days from the filing of this opinion to pay the appellate filing fee or this appeal will be dismissed.
LETTS and MOORE, JJ., concur. . § 924.17, Fla.Stat. (1977).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jackson v. Fla. Dep't OF Corr., 790 So. 2d 381 (Fla. 2001)…, Fla.Stat. (1999).2 We reaffirm that proposition today. See generally Kleinschmidt v. Estate of Kleinschmidt, 392 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Lee v. City of Winter Haven, 386 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); Hillman v. Federal Nat'l Mortgage Ass’n, 375 So. 2d 336, 337 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). We again applaud the efforts of the Legislature in this regard and intend to fully enforce the substantive payment-related provisions of the Prisoner Indigency Statute.3 A statute can, however, have both substantive provis…
-
Smith v. Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 573 So. 2d 320 (Fla. 1991)…the amended statute was intended to overcome certain court decisions which had construed the earlier statute as not being applicable to appeals. Lee v. City of Winter Haven, 386 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); Hillman v. Federal Nat’l Mortgage Ass’n, 375 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979), cert. denied, 385 So. 2d 758 (1980), receded from on other grounds, Fields v. Zinman, 394 So. 2d 1133 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). Likewise, the amended statute made it clear that the residency of the indigent party is no longer relevan…
-
LEE v. City OF Winter Haven, 386 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)…YDER and DAN-AHY, JJ., concur. . The judicial officers of this court stand before the electors of each county within this district for retention to office. . 361 So. 2d 715 (Fla. 4 DCA 1978). See also Adams v. Powers, 278 So. 2d 598 (Fla.1973). . 375 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 4 DCA 1979). . Ch. 29615, Laws of Fla. (1955). See also note, “Proceedings in Forma Pauperis,” Vol. IX, University of Fla.Law Review, 65 at 72 (1956). . Ch. 57-251, § 58.09, Laws of Fla. The title to this act mentions various changes made in…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence