Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Amendments to Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure

Supreme Court of Florida

November 7, 2019

IN RE: AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

          Original Proceeding - Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure

          Thomas D. Hall, Chair, Appellate Court Rules Committee, Tallahassee, Florida, and Courtney Rebecca Brewer, Past Chair, Appellate Court Rules Committee, Tallahassee, Florida; and Joshua E. Doyle, Executive Director, and Heather Savage Telfer, Staff Liaison, The Florida Bar, Tallahassee, Florida, for Petitioner

          PER CURIAM.

         The Court has for consideration out-of-cycle amendments to Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.120 (Discretionary Proceedings to Review Decisions of District Courts of Appeal) and 9.210 (Briefs) proposed by The Florida Bar's Appellate Court Rules Committee (Committee). The proposals are in response to a request by the Court that the Committee propose rule amendments to provide a procedure for respondents to raise cross-review issues in discretionary review proceedings in this Court. See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.140(f). We have jurisdiction[1]and amend the rules with the modifications to the proposed amendments to rule 9.120 explained below.

          The proposed amendments to rules 9.120 and 9.210 were unanimously approved by the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar and were published by both the Committee and the Court. No comments were received in response to either publication.

         A new subdivision (f) titled "Notices of Cross-Review" is added to rule 9.120 (Discretionary Proceedings to Review Decisions of District Courts of Appeal). The new subdivision as proposed by the Committee would have required a respondent who intends to raise cross-review issues in a discretionary review case to serve a notice of cross-review within fifteen days of the rendition of this Court's order accepting jurisdiction. However, we have modified new subdivision (f) of the rule to require a notice of cross-review to be served within five days of the service of a timely filed notice to invoke the Court's discretionary jurisdiction. We also have added a requirement that the notice identify the issue(s) the respondent intends to raise on cross-review. We modified the new subdivision because we agree with the Committee's observation in the report that a notice of cross-review filed at the jurisdiction determination stage of a discretionary review case would be beneficial to the Court in deciding whether it should accept jurisdiction in a case in which a basis exists for the Court to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction. Consistent with our change to new subdivision (f), we have amended subdivision (d) (Briefs on Jurisdiction) of rule 9.120 to allow the petitioner's jurisdictional brief to be served within ten days of the filing of the notice to invoke or the service of a notice of cross-review, if one is filed. Existing subdivision (f) (Briefs on Merits) of rule 9.120 is relettered subdivision (g). Language is added to the second sentence of that subdivision, as proposed by the Committee, to require briefs on cross-review to be served in the same manner as additional briefs under rule 9.210.

         Subdivision (a)(5)(B) of rule 9.210 (Briefs) is amended, as proposed, to address the length of merits briefs in a discretionary review case in which a notice of cross-review has been filed. The amendment makes the page limitations for briefs in such a case the same as the page limitations for briefs in a case in which a cross-appeal has been filed. The amendments to subdivision (c) (Contents of Answer Brief) of rule 9.210 clarify that the contents of an answer brief in a case in which a notice of cross-review has been filed are the same as the contents of an answer brief in a case in which a cross-appeal has been filed. Subdivision (e) (Contents of Cross-Reply Brief) of rule 9.210 is amended to apply to cross-reply briefs in both cross-appeal and cross-review cases and to clarify that the cross-reply brief in a cross-review case is limited to rebuttal of the argument in the cross-answer brief.

         Accordingly, the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure are amended as reflected in the appendix to this opinion. New language is indicated by underscoring; deletions are indicated by struck-through type. The amendments shall become effective on December 1, 2019, at 12:01 a.m.

         It is so ordered.

          CANADY, C.J., and POLSTON, LABARGA, LAWSON, LAGOA, LUCK, and MUÑIZ, JJ., concur.

         THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR REHEARING SHALL NOT ALTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THESE AMENDMENTS.

         APPENDIX

         RULE 9.120. DISCRETIONARY PROCEEDINGS TO REVIEW DECISIONS OF DISTRICT COURTS OF APPEAL

         (a) - ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.