DYLON T. NICHOLS, PETITIONER,
v.
FLORIDA PAROLE AND PROBATION COMMISSION, RESPONDENT
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.
A party seeking waiver of filing fees due to indigency must satisfy the statutory requirements, including obtaining a certification of indigency.
[1] A party seeking review of a lower tribunal's order must file a motion to be relieved of costs with the clerk of the lower tribunal.
[2] A party invoking a court's original jurisdiction must file a motion to be relieved of costs with the clerk of that court.
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 intelligenceAn incarcerated petitioner, claiming indigency, filed a pro se motion to be relieved of filing fees. The court considered the applicability of a recen…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Pro Se Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
WENTWORTH, Judge.
This cause is before us upon petitioner’s pro se motion to be relieved of the filing fee otherwise required by § 35.22(3), Florida Statutes, and Rule 9.110(b), Fla.R.App.P. See Latisi v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 382 So. 2d 1355 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). Petitioner is incarcerated in Florida’s correctional system, and has filed an affidavit indicating that he is indigent and unable to pay the filing fee otherwise required.
Subsequent to our decision in Latisi, supra, the Florida Legislature enacted Chapter 80-348, amending § 57.081(1), Florida Statutes. The bill was signed by the Governor on July 3, 1980, and became law on August 6, 1980. This enactment, relating to judicial or administrative agency proceedings, effects a change in the law which applied in Latisi and provides that:
No prepayment of costs ... is required in any action when the party has obtained a certification of indigency from the clerk in each proceeding, based on an affidavit filed with him that the applicant is indigent and unable to pay the charges otherwise payable.
The statute further requires that the affidavit be accompanied by a written certificate from the party’s counsel when the party is represented by an attorney.
Section 57.081(1), Florida Statutes (1980), provides an exemption, in “any action,’’ from the filing fee which would otherwise be necessary, when the statutory requirements are satisfied. Where a person seeks review of an order of a lower tribunal, the motion to be relieved of costs shall be filed with the clerk of the lower tribunal. Fla.R. App.P. 9.430. Where, as in the present case, a person invokes this court’s original jurisdiction pursuant to Fla.R.App.P. 9.030(b)(3), the motion shall be filed with the clerk of this court.
We hereby direct the clerk of this court to consider petitioner’s motion to be relieved of costs.
En Banc. MILLS, C. J., and McCORD, ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., ERVIN, BOOTH, LARRY G. SMITH, SHIVERS, SHAW, JOANOS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Chappell v. Fla. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 419 So. 2d 1051 (Fla. 1982)…of pursuing legal actions in judicial and administrative proceedings. This provision includes appellate courts. Fields v. Zinman, 394 So. 2d 1133, 1139 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (Hurley, J., concurring); Nichols v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 393 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Kleinschmidt v. Estate of Kleinschmidt, 392 So. 2d 66 (Fla.3d DCA 1981). [*1053] The district court was also correct in saying that in an appellate proceeding, it is the lower tribunal, and not the lower tribunal’s clerk, that h…
-
Chappell v. Fla. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 391 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)…ncies, unlike the courts, do not have a “clerk.” , Art. V, § 2(a), Fla.Const.; In Re Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, 272 So. 2d 65 (Fla.1972); Market v. Johnston, 367 So. 2d 1003 (Fla.1979). . Nichols v. Florida Parole & Probation Commission, 393 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). . We do not reach in this case the question of procedure in “original” jurisdiction matters. Fla.R.App.P. 9.030(b)(3). Therefore, this opinion is not in conflict with Nichols v. Florida Parole & Probation Commission, 393 So. 2d…1 / 2
-
Ludlow v. Brinker, 403 So. 2d 969 (Fla. 1981)…“proceeding,” used in the amended statute, is more encompassing than the term “actionable claim or demand” found in the former statute. See also Fields v. Zinman, 394 So. 2d 1133 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Nichols v. Florida Parole and Probation Comm'n, 393 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980) (en banc); Chappell v. Florida Dep’t of Health and Rehabilitative Servs., 391 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); 1980 Op. Att’y Gen. Fla. 080-86 (Nov. 4, 1980), each construing the amended statute to encompass civil appeals. Whateve…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gino Latisi v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 382 So. 2d 1355 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)