LEO GREENFIELD, APPELLANT,
v.
WYNN WESTMORELAND, ET AL., APPELLEES
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 Third District Court of Appeal granted appellees' motion to strike appellant Leo Greenfield's initial brief for multiple violations of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.210, including unduly argumentative statements, inadequate record citations, and failure to properly designate issues and arguments. The court gave appellant ten days to file a compliant amended brief.
The court held that appellant's initial brief violated Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.210 in multiple respects and granted appellees' motion to strike the brief, ordering appellant to file a compliant amended brief within ten days.
[1] An appellate brief's Statement of the Case and Facts must not be unduly argumentative and must exclude matters immaterial or impertinent to the controversy.
[2] Appellate briefs must contain adequate citations to the record, especially in fact-intensive appeals.
Previewing 2 of 6 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 Statement of the Case and the Facts is unduly argumentative and contains matters immaterial and impertinent to the controversy between the parties.”
Establishes the primary violations found in the appellant's brief, citing the standard from Williams v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Leo Greenfield filed an initial brief in an appeal involving a real estate development matter against appellees Wynn Westmoreland, William M…
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.
Appellees, Wynn Westmoreland, William Moon, and Gerry Christensen, have moved to strike the initial brief of Appellant, Leo Greenfield, as violative of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.210. We grant the motion to strike.
A cursory review of the initial brief reflects multiple violations of the appellate rules. The Statement of the Case and the Facts is unduly argumentative and contains matters immaterial and impertinent to the controversy between the parties. See Williams v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 548 So.2d 829 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)(striking Williams’ initial brief because it was unduly argumentative and contained matters immaterial and impertinent to the controversy between the parties). Citations to the record are inadequate throughout the brief. See Davis v. Sails, 306 So.2d 615 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)(striking Davis’s initial brief for failure to cite to record in accordance with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.120(b)(3)). At one point, appellant’s “statement of facts” includes a three-page recitation of purported occurrences in an apparently disputed real estate development matter without a single record citation. Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.210(b)(3) does not countenance this type of conduct. In fact-intensive appeals, frequent citations to the record are required.
Although multiple issues on appeal are raised, the Table of Contents of the Brief does not list the issues or arguments on appeal or places where each may be found. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.210(b)(1). The initial brief itself likewise fails to separately set *2forth “[ajrgument with regard to each issue including the applicable appellate standard of review” as required by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.210(b)(5). For these and many other reasons which will be apparent to appellant after he reviews Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.210, the initial brief filed by him is viola-tive of the appellate rules. As a frequent litigant before this court, we are confident the appellant in this case, albeit pro se, is capable of complying with the rules.
The motion to strike appellant’s brief is granted. Appellant shall file within ten days an amended initial brief which fully complies with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.210. Among other things, appellant shall delete all legal and rhetorical argument contained in the Statement of the Case and the Facts, specifically denominate the points on appeal in the Table of Contents and in the argument section of the brief, and make pinpoint citations to both the record on appeal and any case authority cited in support of the relief he seeks. See Williams v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 548 So.2d at 829.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Plumer v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 231 So. 3d 512 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)…rule 9.200. The parties are required to abide by these rules. We recognize that Plumer is proceeding in this appeal pro se, as is his right. Nevertheless, pro se parties are obligated to abide by the appellate rules. See Greenfield v. Westmoreland, 156 So. 3d 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). So ordered. . At this stage, the record of the proceedings in this case is minimal; indeed, the limited record before us reveals no counterclaim,…
-
Eilert v. The Whatley Living Tr., 37 So. 3d 967 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
-
Woods v. Loandepot.com, LLC (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)…ng Singer v. Borbua, 497 So. 2d 279, 281 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)); see also Plumer II v. U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 231 So. 3d 512, 513 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (“[P]ro se parties are obligated to abide by the appellate rules.”) (citing Greenfield v. Westmoreland, 156 So. 3d 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)).…
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 548 So. 2d 829 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Davis v. Sails, 306 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)