Raulerson v. Sherrill

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Raulerson v. Sherrill

101 So. 2d 444, 1958 Fla. App. LEXIS 2710

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 19, 1958

DocketNo. 249

StatusPublished

This text of 101 So. 2d 444 (Raulerson v. Sherrill) 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

Raulerson v. Sherrill, 101 So. 2d 444, 1958 Fla. App. LEXIS 2710 (Fla. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellees filed a motion to quash and a motion to affirm on the 10th of December, 1957, which said motions were denied by this Court on the 22nd day of January, 1958. Subsequently, on the 17th day of February, 1958, the appellees filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for failure of the appellants to file a brief within the time allowed by the Florida Appellate Rules, rule 3.7.

The motion to dismiss the appeal was heard by this Court the 12th day of March,, 1958. The appellants filed what was designated as “Brief of Appellants” in which they state:

“Appellants have adequately argued the law applicable to the issue presented and adopt their original brief heretofore filed as their brief on appeal.”

The brief referred to was the brief which the appellants had filed on the 6th day of January, 1958, in opposition to the appellees’ motions to quash and to affirm. The brief of the appellants on the merits was due to be filed in this court on or before the 5th day of February, 1958. The so-called “Brief of Appellants” filed on the 24th of February, in which they seek to adopt their brief which was filed in .opposition to the appellees’ motions to quash and to affirm as their brief on the merits of this cause, is [445]*445not a sufficient compliance with the Florida Appellate Rules.

Wherefore, we grant the motion of the appellees to dismiss the appeal on the authority of Redditt v. State, Fla.1955, 84 So.2d 317; City of Coral Gables v. State ex rel. Hassenteufel, Fla.1948, 38 So.2d 467; Lynn v. City of Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. 1955, 81 So.2d 511.

Appeal dismissed.

ALLEN, Acting Chief Judge, SHANNON, J., and BIRD, JOHN U., Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellees filed a motion to quash and a motion to affirm on the 10th of December, 1957, which said motions were denied by this Court on the 22nd day of January, 1958. Subsequently, on the 17th day of February, 1958, the appellees filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for failure of the appellants to file a brief within the time allowed by the Florida Appellate Rules, rule 3.7.

The motion to dismiss the appeal was heard by this Court the 12th day of March,, 1958. The appellants filed what was designated as “Brief of Appellants” in which they state:

“Appellants have adequately argued the law applicable to the issue presented and adopt their original brief heretofore filed as their brief on appeal.”

The brief referred to was the brief which the appellants had filed on the 6th day of January, 1958, in opposition to the appellees’ motions to quash and to affirm. The brief of the appellants on the merits was due to be filed in this court on or before the 5th day of February, 1958. The so-called “Brief of Appellants” filed on the 24th of February, in which they seek to adopt their brief which was filed in .opposition to the appellees’ motions to quash and to affirm as their brief on the merits of this cause, is [445]*445not a sufficient compliance with the Florida Appellate Rules.

Wherefore, we grant the motion of the appellees to dismiss the appeal on the authority of Redditt v. State, Fla.1955, 84 So.2d 317; City of Coral Gables v. State ex rel. Hassenteufel, Fla.1948, 38 So.2d 467; Lynn v. City of Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. 1955, 81 So.2d 511.

Appeal dismissed.

ALLEN, Acting Chief Judge, SHANNON, J., and BIRD, JOHN U., Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 So. 2d 444, 1958 Fla. App. LEXIS 2710, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raulerson-v-sherrill-fladistctapp-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack