BOSELLI
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
An attorney who repeatedly fails to comply with court orders directing payment of filing fees and compliance with appellate rules may be referred to the state bar for disciplinary investigation.
[1] An attorney's repeated failure to comply with appellate court orders regarding filing fees and procedural requirements, despite multiple warnings and opportunities to cur…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAttorney Ford filed a notice of appeal on January 20, 2026, without the required $300 filing fee. The court issued multiple orders requiring payment o…
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 Sanctions For Non-Compliance With Court Orders cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
JOHN BOSELLI
Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
No. 2D2026-0155
July 31, 2026
ORDER FOLLOWING SHOW-CAUSE PROCEEDING
PER CURIAM.
Attorney Patrick Ford, Florida Bar Number 977934, appeared before this court on Wednesday, April 8, 2026, to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for his failure to comply with this court's orders.
Attorney Ford filed the notice of appeal in the trial court on January 20, 2026, and the notice was transmitted to this court on January 21. No filing fee accompanied the notice, so this court issued its standard fee order on January 21. The order required the appellant to submit to this court the $300 filing fee or indigency documentation within twenty days, failing which the appeal would be subject to dismissal and counsel subject to sanctions. Attorney Ford did not respond.
On February 26, 2026, this court issued an order directing Attorney Ford to respond to the January 21 order or risk the imposition of sanctions. Attorney Ford did not respond.
On March 24, 2026, this court issued an order requiring Attorney Ford to appear at the court's April 8 oral argument session to show cause why he should not be sanctioned for his failure to respond to the orders just described. The order provided that if Attorney Ford complied with the order by 1 p.m. on Thursday, April 2, 2026, he could seek to discharge the order to show cause. Attorney Ford did not take advantage of the purge provision.
On April 8, 2026, Attorney Ford paid the filing fee and then appeared before the court to explain his failure to respond to the court's orders. Attorney Ford stated that Appellant asked him to file a notice of appeal in this case and another case, but Appellant then expressed a desire to dismiss this appeal. Attorney Ford asked Appellant to send him a written request to dismiss this appeal, but Appellant did not do so. As a result, Attorney Ford paid the filing fee. Attorney Ford stated that he was negligent in not getting this matter sorted out. The court advised Attorney Ford that he would hear from the court.
On April 17, 2026, the court issued an order advising Attorney Ford that he remains counsel of record until he demonstrates full compliance with Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.140(d) and 9.440(b). The order provided guidance and directed Attorney Ford to comply within thirty days, noting that the order to show cause remained pending. Attorney Ford did not respond.
Due to Attorney Ford's failure to comply with this court's directives and the attendant delays, we hereby refer this matter to The Florida Bar for investigation and initiation of such proceedings as may be appropriate.
NORTHCUTT, ATKINSON, and LABRIT, JJ., Concur.
Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.