Brooks v. Taylor

181 So. 2d 190, 1965 Fla. App. LEXIS 3621
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 14, 1965
DocketNo. H-43
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 181 So. 2d 190 (Brooks v. Taylor) 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
Brooks v. Taylor, 181 So. 2d 190, 1965 Fla. App. LEXIS 3621 (Fla. Ct. App. 1965).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellees have moved to dismiss this appeal on the ground that the brief filed by-appellants fails to comply with the rules of civil procedure.

Rule 3.7, subd. f(4), 31 F.S.A., requires that the specific assignments of error from which the points argued arise should be stated immediately following the statement of the points involved as set forth in the argument section of the brief. By their brief appellants fail to relate any assignment of error to the argument under any point stated therein.

Rule 3.7, subd. f(3) requires that a statement of the case and of the facts and points involved be set forth in a clear and concise manner in the brief. Appellants’ brief combines a statement of the case and of the facts contrary to the rule, and fails to separately set forth the points involved on the appeal.

This court has repeatedly required a reasonable compliance with the rules of appellate procedure by attorneys practicing before it. Only by a substantial compliance with the rules will the court be able to properly discharge its duties in disposing of the-questions brought to it for disposition.

Appellees’ motion to dismiss the appeal is treated as a motion to strike appellants’' brief, and as such is granted. Appellants are allowed fifteen days from the filing of this opinion within which to file and serve a proper brief complying with the rules of appellate procedure hereinabove mentioned.

WIGGINTON, Acting C. J., and STUR-GIS and CARROLL, DONALD K., JJ.„ concur.

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

Related

Adjustment Specialists, Inc. v. Collection Bureau of Orlando, Inc.
221 So. 2d 443 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1969)
Cossette v. State
221 So. 2d 427 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
181 So. 2d 190, 1965 Fla. App. LEXIS 3621, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brooks-v-taylor-fladistctapp-1965.