MONROE-JACKSON HOSPITAL, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION; RUBIN KUTUN; ALLEN FIRST; FLOYD KRANZ; AND HOWARD C. EDWARDS, APPELLANTS,
v.
THOMAS A. SCARANE, 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 court dismissed an appeal because the appellants failed to file their brief by the deadline and offered no substantial reason for the delay. This highlights the importance of adhering to appellate court rules for timely prosecution of appeals.
Yes, the appeal should be dismissed because the appellants failed to prosecute their appeal in accordance with the rules and did not provide a substantial reason for their delay.
“The appellee moved to dismiss this appeal upon the ground that the appellants had failed to file their brief.”
Establishes the procedural basis for the court's review.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellants filed a notice of appeal on August 27, 1959. Their brief was due on November 5, 1959. The appellee filed a motion to dismiss the appeal…
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.
The appellee moved to dismiss this appeal upon the ground that the appellants had failed to file their brief. An examination of the record revealed that notice of appeal was filed August 27, 1959, and appellants’ brief was due November 5, 1959. Appellee’s motion was filed November 25th and set for hearing on December 7th. On December 5th appellants tendered a brief. The appellants have not by motion or at argument upon appellee’s motion offered any substantial reason for their failure to prosecute their appeal in accordance with the Florida Appellate Rules, rule 1.1 et seq., 31 F.S.A. This appeal is therefore dismissed. Graham v. Thornton, Fla.App.1958, 104 So.2d 95; accord, Farmer v. State, Fla.1958, 104 So.2d 94.
HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Garden State Props., Inc. v. The Dir. OF the Dade Cnty. Bldg. & Zoning Dep't, 292 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)…d were filed before a hearing could be had on the motion. Nevertheless, the court denied the last requested extension and dismissed the petition. No abuse of discretion is shown. We affirm. See Monroe-Jackson Hospital, Inc. v. Scarane, Fla.App.1960, 117 So. 2d 6. Affirmed.…
-
Parada Holding Co. v. Asher Sulkin, 126 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961)…late duties imposed upon counsel. This is particularly true where the application for extension of time is made after the expiration of the time limited, and after motion to dismiss is pending. Monroe-Jackson Hospital, Inc. v. Scarane, Fla.App.1960, 117 So. 2d 6, 7; Graham v. Thornton, Fla.App. 1958, 104 So. 2d 95. The appeal is dismissed. HORTON, C. J., and CARROLL, CHAS., J., concur. . “Rule 3.7a. Appellant’s Main Brief, Service. At least 40 clays before the elate upon which the record-on-appeal is req…
Authorities Cited
- Graham v. Mammie Thornton, 104 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958)
- Farmer v. State, 104 So. 2d 94 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958)