OZA B. JENKINS, APPELLANT,

v.

MOTOROLA, INC., ET AL., APPELLEES

Fla. 3d DCA | 2011-04-20

No. 3D10-3271

Before SHEPHERD, SUAREZ, and CORTIÑAS, JJ.

82 So. 3d 844 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2011)

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 affirmed the trial court's order denying the appellant's request for payment and granted sanctions for a frivolous appeal.

Facts & Procedural History

The appellant, Oza Jenkins, filed a frivolous appeal after her request for payment was denied by the trial court. This appeal was one of many meritles…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Topics

Frivolous Appeal Sanctions Attorney'S Fees

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Frivolous Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

SHEPHERD, J.

The trial court’s December 13, 2010, order denying Oza B. Jenkins’ request for payment, is affirmed.

Appellee’s, Motorola, Inc., and Cingular, Inc., motion for sanctions pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes, (2011), for filing a frivolous appeal is granted. We remand to the trial court for an award to Motorola, Inc. of its attorney fees and costs incurred on this appeal.

Appellant, Oza Jenkins, is ordered to show cause, within twenty days of the date of this opinion, why she should not be barred from filing further pro se proceedings in this Court arising out of lower tribunal case number 04-1420.1 See Sibley *845 v. Sibley, 885 So.2d 980 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004). Motorola, Inc. is invited to respond within ten days thereafter.

. The following is a partial list of the merit-less filings by Jenkins in this Court: Jenkins v. Motorola, Inc., 23 So.3d 726 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (affirming); Jenkins v. Motorola, Inc., 994 So.2d 1253, 1254 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (affirming trial court’s order in “all respects” and reaffirming “the trial court's directive that Jenkins file no further motions in this action without the prior approval of the trial court”); Jenkins v. Motorola, Inc., 986 So.2d 613 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (table) (denying petition for writ of certiorari filed by Jenkins); Jenkins v. Motorola, Inc., 973 So.2d 454 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (table) (denying petition for writ of certiorari filed by Jenkins); Jenkins v. Motorola, Inc., 961 So.2d 951 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (dismissing appeal); Jenkins v. Motorola, Inc., 953 So.2d 537 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (per curiam affirmance); Jenkins v. Motorola, Inc., 939 So.2d 1073 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) *845(table) (dismissing appeal). We do note Ms. Jenkins had one successful appeal in this Court, on the procedural ground that the trial court ruled on a motion after he had recused himself. See Jenkins v. Motorola, Inc., 911 So.2d 196 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005).

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

Montgomery Blair Sibley v. Sibley, 885 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)
Oza Jenkins v. Motorola, Inc., 911 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
Oza B. Jenkins v. Motorola, Inc., 994 So. 2d 1253 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw

OZA B. JENKINS, APPELLANT, v. MOTOROLA, INC., ET AL., APPELLEES

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

OZA B. JENKINS, APPELLANT,

v.

MOTOROLA, INC., ET AL., APPELLEES