Doss v. Tucker, Tucker

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: October 29, 2025
• Docket: 2D2025-0097
• Status: Published

Opinion

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

_______________________________

SURGRET URANIA DOSS, Appellant, v. CHANDRA D. TUCKER and LINDA TUCKER, Appellees.

No. 2D2025-0097 _______________________________ October 29, 2025 Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.130(a)(3)(C)(i) from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Emily A. Peacock, Judge.

Surgret Urania Doss, pro se.

DeeAnn J. McLemore and Tabitha C. Blackwell of Banker Lopez Gassler P.A., St. Petersburg, for Appellees.

ORDER RESTRICTING APPELLANT FROM FUTURE PRO SE FILINGS PER CURIAM.

On September 17, 2025, this court issued an order detailing Appellant's initiation of over ten appeals or original proceedings in this court relating to his dispute with Chandra Tucker; Linda Tucker; Basquill Roe, P.A.; Michael A. Roe; John Shim, M.D.; John H. Shim, M.D., P.A.; and other entities arising from Hillsborough Circuit Court case numbers 2018-CA-3553, 22-CA-9303, and 25-CA-0054. The order directed Appellant to show cause why this court should not direct the clerk to reject pleadings in this court related to case numbers 2018-CA- 3553, 22-CA-9303, and 25-CA-0054 unless the filing is related to a pending proceeding or submitted by a licensed Florida attorney. See State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47, 48–49 (Fla. 1999). Appellant's response is unavailing as it fails to justify his meritless and repetitive filings and instead recounts arguments made to this court numerous times. Accordingly, we direct the clerk of this court to place in an inactive file any original proceedings or notices of appeal filed by Appellant related to the lower tribunal case numbers listed in this order unless the filing is signed by a member in good standing of The Florida Bar. See id.

VILLANTI, BLACK, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.

Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.