Bennett v. Florida National Bank

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bennett v. Florida National Bank

517 So. 2d 97, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 57, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 11700, 1987 WL 3179

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 22, 1987

DocketNo. BT-90

StatusPublished

This text of 517 So. 2d 97 (Bennett v. Florida National Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bennett v. Florida National Bank, 517 So. 2d 97, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 57, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 11700, 1987 WL 3179 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant has filed a motion for leave to file an enlarged brief. See Fla.R.App.P. 9.210(a)(5). The motion states that the case is particularly complicated, both factually and legally, and the record is voluminous. However, appellant has not submitted a proposed brief. Although the appellate rules do not require that the brief accompany a motion to exceed the 50 page limit, it is difficult, if not impossible, to determine the necessity for exceeding the standard page limit without perusing the brief itself. Generally, this court strictly enforces the 50 page limit of Rule 9.210, and will be particularly inclined to do so when a motion to file an enlarged brief is not accompanied by a proposed brief.

Accordingly, the motion to file an enlarged brief is denied.

SMITH, C.J., and ERVIN and JOANOS, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Appellant has filed a motion for leave to file an enlarged brief. See Fla.R.App.P. 9.210(a)(5). The motion states that the case is particularly complicated, both factually and legally, and the record is voluminous. However, appellant has not submitted a proposed brief. Although the appellate rules do not require that the brief accompany a motion to exceed the 50 page limit, it is difficult, if not impossible, to determine the necessity for exceeding the standard page limit without perusing the brief itself. Generally, this court strictly enforces the 50 page limit of Rule 9.210, and will be particularly inclined to do so when a motion to file an enlarged brief is not accompanied by a proposed brief.

Accordingly, the motion to file an enlarged brief is denied.

SMITH, C.J., and ERVIN and JOANOS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

517 So. 2d 97, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 57, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 11700, 1987 WL 3179, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bennett-v-florida-national-bank-fladistctapp-1987.