CENTRAL FLORIDA WETLANDS SOCIETY, APPELLANT,
v.
FIRSTATE FINANCIAL, A SAVINGS BANK, 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.
The appellate court granted the appellee's motion to supplement the record but criticized the appellant for failing to comply with procedural rules requiring a statement of judicial acts to be reviewed. The court clarified the burden on appellants to ensure proper record preparation and transmission.
The motion to supplement the record is granted, but the court emphasized that the appellant failed to comply with the procedural requirement to serve a statement of judicial acts to be reviewed. The burden to ensure proper record preparation and transmission rests with the appellant, not the appellee.
[1] An appellant must serve a statement of judicial acts to be reviewed when directing that less than the entire record or transcript be transmitted to the appellate court.
[2] The purpose of requiring an appellant to serve a statement of judicial acts is to allow the opposing party to determine if additional record portions are needed.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“The burden to ensure that the record is prepared and transmitted in accordance with these rules shall be on the petitioner or appellant. Any party may enforce the provisions of this rule by motion.”
Establishes that the appellant bears the responsibility for proper record transmission, not the appellee.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCentral Florida Wetlands Society filed an appeal and directed the clerk to transmit less than the entire record on May 29, 1992. However, the appellan…
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 Supplementing The Record cases and more on FLexlaw
PETERSON, Judge.
The appellee, Firstate Financial, a Savings Bank, has moved pursuant to rule 9.200(f)(2), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, to supplement the record in this appeal. The motion was filed on June 18, 1992, after the appellant filed its initial brief on May 29, 1992. While we grant the motion, we do so only because the appellant was deficient in its directions to the clerk.
Rule 9.200(a)(2), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, requires an appellant to serve upon an appellee a statement of judicial acts to be reviewed when it directs that less than the entire record or less than the transcript of all testimony in a proceeding is to be transmitted to the appellate court. The 1988 revision of the committee notes indicates that the purpose of the rule is so that the opposing party may determine whether additional portions of the record are required. The omission of such a statement which was required by the rule to be served with appellant’s directions to the clerk in the instant case may have been the source of a problem that required the appellee to file its motion to supplement the record after the appellant’s initial brief had been filed. The brief would have specifically described the judicial acts to be reviewed. We also note that the appellee had twenty days within which to direct the clerk to include additional documents and exhibits after the appellant’s directions and statement were served. Appellee in the instant case served its motion to supplement the record within twenty days of service of the appellant’s brief — an unpres-cribed time period, but certainly timely using the rule as a standard had the appellant complied with the requirement of a statement.
While appellee moved to supplement the record pursuant to subsection (f)(2) of the rule, we note that subsection (e) is perhaps the more appropriate authority. The rule states:
(e) Duty of Appellant or Petitioner. The burden to ensure that the record is prepared and transmitted in accordance with these rules shall be on the petitioner or appellant. Any party may enforce the provisions of this rule by motion.
The burden was upon the appellant to ensure that the record was prepared and transmitted in accordance with the rules. It did not when it failed to file the required statement of judicial acts to be reviewed with the special directions to the clerk of the circuit court.
The appellant shall have 25 days from the date of this order within which to file an amended initial brief should it choose to do so.
Motion GRANTED.
GOSHORN, C.J., concurs.
DAUKSCH, J., concurs in conclusion only.