LAWRENCE BROXTON, SR., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION, DR. JAMES E. SURRATT, AS SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, VOLUSIA COUNTY, FLORIDA AND VOLUSIA COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 1992-07-02
No. 92-939
HARRIS and PETERSON, JJ., concur.
601 So. 2d 1292 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (1992) Positive Treatment
Cited by 5 cases

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.

Holding

The court held that an appeal is commenced when the notice of appeal is filed in the appellate court, not necessarily with the agency.

Facts & Procedural History

Appellee moved to dismiss the appeal, arguing the notice of appeal was not timely filed with the agency. The notice was filed with the appellate court…

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.

Topics
Administrative Orders Timeliness Of Appeal Notice Of Appeal Jurisdiction

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Administrative Orders cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
DAUKSCH, Judge.

DAUKSCH, Judge.

ON MOTION TO DISMISS

Appellee moves to dismiss this appeal on the basis that this court lacks jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. He cites Butterfield v. Dept. of Environmental Regulation, 470 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985) as authority and says that because appellant did not file the notice of appeal with the agency clerk, the Department of Education, within the proper time — thirty days from the rendering of the decision below — that this court should dismiss the appeal.

A closer reading of Butterfield and consideration of Hines v. Lykes Pasco Packing, 374 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979) and Franchi v. Florida Dept. of Commerce, Div. of Employment Sec., Bd. of Review, 375 So. 2d 1154 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979) is warranted.

In Hines and Franchi it was held that “... an appeal of an administrative order [is] commenced when a copy of the notice of appeal [is] filed in the appellate court....” We agree with this holding and add that the original notice of appeal filed in this court must logically also suffice, upon the same reasoning as in those cases. It should be noted that Butterfield says “... file a notice of appeal in [the agency] or in this court ...” within the requisite thirty days time.

MOTION DENIED.

HARRIS and PETERSON, JJ., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • State v. Cappalo, 932 So. 2d 331 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)
    …with the jury’s guilty verdicts on the aggravated fleeing and eluding and attempted assault charges. As the foregoing authorities make clear, however, such a factual or logical inconsistency is permissible under Florida law. See also Lleo v. State, 601 So. 2d 1292, 1293 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (holding that verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity on one charge was not impermissibly inconsistent with guilty verdict on related charges but that “jury’s verdicts reflect only what has been referred to as a ‘logica…
  • Roadrunner Constr., Inc. v. Dep't of Fin. Servs., 33 So. 3d 78 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
    …nterpreted to vest jurisdiction in the appellate court if either copy of the notice was filed within the jurisdictional time period for taking an appeal. See Williams v. Greadington, 410 So. 2d 644 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Broxton v. State Bd. of Educ., 601 So. 2d 1292 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992). However, in the present case the duplicate copy [*82] of the notice was also filed beyond the jurisdictional time limit. If we were to conclude that the duplicate copy of the notice of appeal was alone sufficient to establish a…
  • Qosaj v. State (Fla. 2d DCA 2020)
    …ve years or older, with a deadly weapon. See §§ 784.045(1)(a), 784.08. - 9 - two offenses was legally inconsistent with the guilty verdict on two other offenses committed in the same criminal episode. 932 So. 2d at 333-34; see also Lleo v. State, 601 So. 2d 1292, 1293 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) ("We are unable to agree with appellant that the jury's verdict of not guilty, by reason of insanity, on the count charging aggravated battery is legally inconsistent with the jury's guilty verdicts on the two counts chargi…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw