DEVENSON WALKER
v.
ESTATE OF ROBERT YEE
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.
Pro se litigants must comply with the same appellate briefing standards as licensed counsel, including citation to legal authority and the record, or face affirmance due to waiver of arguments.
[1] A pro se litigant is bound by the same rules of appellate procedure that apply to licensed attorneys.
[2] An appellate court is entitled to believe that points, positions, facts, and supporting authorities omitted from a brief are waived, abandoned, or deemed unworthy.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“In Florida, pro se litigants are bound by the same rules that apply to counsel.”
Court citing Stueber v. Gallagher regarding the standard of review for pro se appellants
Walker, proceeding pro se, appealed a dismissal of his complaint with prejudice after he failed to appear at the hearing on the motion to dismiss. His…
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 Appellate Brief Requirements cases and more on FLexlaw
Appeal from the County Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Tabitha Blackmon, Judge; L.T. Case No. COWE22-001495.
Devenson A. Walker, Sunrise, pro se. Kansas R. Gooden and Nicholas Ryan Consalvo of Boyd & Jenerette, P.A., Boca Raton, for appellees Estate of Robert Yee and Ted Yee.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, pro se, appeals the final order dismissing his complaint with prejudice, as well as the order denying his motion to vacate dismissal and motion for rehearing, after appellant failed to appear at the hearing on the motion to dismiss. Appellant’s brief cites no legal authority and contains no citations to the record on appeal. “It is the duty of counsel to prepare appellate briefs so as to acquaint the Court with the material facts, the points of law involved, and the legal arguments supporting the positions of the respective parties.” Polyglycoat Corp. v. Hirsch Distribs., Inc., 442 So. 2d 958, 960 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). “When points, positions, facts and supporting authorities are omitted from the brief, a court is entitled to believe that such are waived, abandoned, or deemed by counsel to be unworthy.” Id. Appellant, as a pro se litigant, was still required to adequately present his arguments on appeal. Stueber v. Gallagher, 812 So. 2d 454, 457 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (“In Florida, pro se litigants are bound by the same rules that apply to counsel.”); Kohn v. City of Miami Beach, 611 So. 2d 538, 539 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) (“[I]t is a mistake to hold a pro se litigant to a lesser standard than a reasonably competent attorney.”);
2
Figueroa v. Kossiver, 336 So. 3d 1260, 1264 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022) (applying Polyglycoat principles to a pro se litigant’s brief). The deficiencies in appellant’s brief mandate affirmance.
Affirmed. KLINGENSMITH, C.J., GROSS, and LEVINE, JJ., concur.
* * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Goya v. Hayashida, 418 So. 3d 652 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025)
-
Kiffer v. Bozik, 413 So. 3d 807 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025)
-
Rubin v. Swink Innovations Inc. (Fla. 4th DCA 2024)
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Miami Beach Cmty. Church, Inc. v. Stanton, 611 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
- Lussy v. Dep't of Legal Affairs, 356 So. 3d 784 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024)