Header Image Header Image
Florida Court Links Opinion Links New Query Help
Footer Image
Date Docketed Description Filed By Notes
09/03/2021 Notice of Appeal Filed Michael A. Abel 0075078 order appealed attached
09/03/2021 Notice of Appeal Transmittal Form Gwen Marshall
09/03/2021 Notice of Appeal / Acknowledgement letter Notice of Appeal from the lower tribunal reflecting a filing date of September 2, 2021.
09/08/2021 Motion To Stay Michael A. Abel 0075078 motion to reinstate automatic stay
09/08/2021 Appendix Michael A. Abel 0075078 to motion to reinstate automatic stay
09/09/2021 SC Why Mot Should Not Be Granted      Appellants filed an emergency motion to reinstate the automatic stay on Wednesday, September 8, 2021. Appellees may file a response to the motion no later than 8:00 p.m. on Thursday, September 9, 2021.
09/09/2021 RESPONSE Charles R. Gallagher 510041
09/09/2021 Appendix Charles R. Gallagher 510041
09/10/2021 Grant Stay The appellants ask that we quash the trial court’s vacatur of the automatic stay imposed by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.310(b)(2). When a public officer or agency seeks appellate review, which is the case here, there is a presumption under the rule in favor of a stay, and the stay should be vacated only for the most compelling of reasons. See Fla. Dep’t of Health v. People United for Med. Marijuana, 250 So. 3d 825, 828 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018). Upon our review of the trial court’s final judgment and the operative pleadings, we have serious doubts about standing, jurisdiction, and other threshold matters. These doubts significantly militate against the likelihood of the appellees’ ultimate success in this appeal. Given the presumption against vacating the automatic stay, the stay should have been left in place pending appellate review. Accordingly, we grant the appellants’ motion, quash the trial court’s order vacating the automatic stay, and reinstate the stay required by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.310(b)(2). A written order explaining this disposition will follow. RAY, JAY, and TANENBAUM, JJ., concur.
09/10/2021 Appendix Charles R. Gallagher 510041 to AE's suggestion order by certified
09/10/2021 Motion SUGGEST T/CERT. CAUSE T/SC Charles R. Gallagher 510041
09/20/2021 RESPONSE Michael A. Abel 0075078 response in opposition to suggestion that order by certified as requiring immediate resolution by the FL S.C.
09/23/2021 Docketing Statement
09/24/2021 Deny Certification of Cause to Supreme Ct Certification, as suggested pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.125 by the appellees on September 10, 2021, is denied.
09/28/2021 Notice of Appearance Raymond Treadwell 93834
09/29/2021 Acknowledgment of Service List      The notice filed by counsel for the Appellant on September 28, 2021, providing e-mail addresses, is acknowledged. However, in addition to filing such notice, counsel of record are responsible for ensuring their primary and/or secondary e-mail addresses under their profile in the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal and eDCA are consistent with the filed notice in order to receive e-mailed notification (Casemail) from the court. Profiles for eDCA users may be updated by clicking on the “My Profile” link and clicking the “Submit” button after making the desired changes.
10/01/2021 Notice of Cross Appeal Charles R. Gallagher 510041 Lesley Abravanel and Magnus Andersson, individually and on behalf of S.A. and A.A., minors; Kristen Thompson, individually and on behalf of P.T., a minor; Amy Nell, individually and on behalf of O.S., a minor, and Damaris Allen, individually and on behalf of E.A., a minor
10/01/2021 Miscellaneous Docket Entry attachment to cross notice
10/04/2021 Initial Brief on Merits Michael A. Abel 0075078
10/04/2021 Appendix Michael A. Abel 0075078 to IB
10/04/2021 Notice of Appearance Kristin A. Norse 0965634 (e-mail address furnished)
10/04/2021 Notice of Appearance Stuart C. Markman 0322571
10/04/2021 Notice of Appearance Katherine Earle Yanes 159727
10/04/2021 Notice of Appearance Brandon Kyle Breslow 0123755
10/05/2021 Acknowledgment of Service List      The notices of appearance filed by co-counsel on behalf of Appellees Lesley Abravanel and Magnus Andersson, individually and on behalf of S.A. and A.A., minors; Kristen Thompson, individually and on behalf of P.T., a minor; Amy Nell, individually and on behalf of O.S., a minor; and Damaris Allen, individually and on behalf of E.A., a minor, on October 4, 2021, providing e-mail addresses, is acknowledged. However, in addition to filing such notice, counsel of record are responsible for ensuring their primary and/or secondary e-mail addresses under their profile in the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal and eDCA are consistent with the filed notice in order to receive e-mailed notification (Casemail) from the court. Profiles for eDCA users may be updated by clicking on the “My Profile” link and clicking the “Submit” button after making the desired changes.
10/07/2021 Cr. Appl-Pay Fee/Subm LT Ord Insolv 35.22(2)(b) Appellees Lesley Abravanel and Magnus Andersson, individually and on behalf of S.A. and A.A., minors; Kristen Thompson, individually and on behalf of P.T., a minor; Amy Nell, individually and on behalf of O.S., a minor, and Damaris Allen, individually and on behalf of E.A., a minor, have filed a notice of cross appeal in this case without the entry of a lower tribunal order of insolvency or deposit of the statutory filing fee.  Accordingly, Appellees/Cross-Appellants shall, within 30 days from the date of this order, either file a certified copy of the lower tribunal's order of insolvency for appellate purposes as required by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.430 or pay to the clerk of this Court the sum of $295.00 as the appellate filing fee required by the applicable rule of procedure and Section 35.22(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2018).  If Appellees/Cross-Appellants seek a waiver of the filing fee on the grounds of indigency, Appellees/Cross-Appellants shall file a motion and affidavit of indigency with the clerk of the lower tribunal (the court, agency, officer, board, commission, or body whose order is to be reviewed) for a determination by the lower tribunal of whether an order of insolvency should be issued pursuant to Rule 9.430 and Section 57.081(1) or 57.085(2), Florida Statutes (2018), as applicable. The cross appeal shall not be permitted to proceed until the order of insolvency is filed or the fee is paid.  Failure to comply with this order will result in the dismissal of the cross appeal without further opportunity to be heard. Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.410.                             
10/07/2021 CROSS NOTICE FILING FEE PAID THROUGH PORTAL
10/22/2021 Motion To Expedite Michael A. Abel 0075078
10/27/2021 Order ORDER ON APPELLANTS’ EMERGENCY MOTION TO REINSTATE THE AUTOMATIC STAY The Department of Health (“DOH”) has the statutory authority to adopt rules, after consulting with the Department of Education (“DOE”), that govern “the control of preventable communicable diseases” within the public schools. § 1003.22(3), Fla. Stat. On July 30, 2021, Governor Ron DeSantis issued Executive Order 21-175, directing this very action, to “ensure safety protocols for controlling the spread of COVID-19 in schools.” The order, though, directed that any rule promulgated “not violate Floridians’ constitutional freedoms; . . . not violate parents’ rights under Florida law to make health care decisions for their minor children; and . . . [p]rotect children with disabilities or health conditions who would be harmed by certain protocols such as face masking requirements.” Fla. Exec. Order No. 21-175 (July 30, 2021). The order also required that any rule “be in accordance with Florida’s ‘Parents’ Bill of Rights’ and protect parents’ right to make decisions regarding masking of their children in relation to COVID-19.” Id. DOH promulgated Emergency Rule 64DER21-12, which became effective August 6, 2021. See Fla. Admin. Code R. 64DER21-12 (Protocols for Controlling COVID-19 in School Settings), Vol. 47, No. 153, Fla. Admin. Reg. (August 9, 2021). This rule later was withdrawn. This emergency rule outlined procedures for controlling COVID-19 in schools, including protocols for when students are exposed to, test positive for, or are symptomatic of the virus. While it allowed students to wear masks, it also required that schools allow parents and legal guardians to opt-out their children from any mask-wearing requirement. The appellees sought emergency declaratory relief as to both the executive order and the emergency rule on the following grounds: (Count I) that the parental opt-outs in the executive order were in violation of the constitutional requirement to provide safe public schools; (Count II) that the executive order’s parental opt-outs contravened the home rule powers of local school districts; (Counts III and IV) that the executive order violated the due process clause of the Florida Constitution by usurping the authority of local school districts and the authority of DOH; (Count V) that the emergency rule infringed on the appellees’ constitutional right to safe public schools; and (Count VI) incorporating all previous counts and seeking emergency injunctive relief against the executive order. After a four-day evidentiary hearing, the trial court rendered a final order that granted the appellees’ request for injunctive relief against DOE, Florida’s commissioner of education, and the State Board of Education (collectively, “the Education Defendants”), predicated, ostensibly, on counts III and IV. The court denied relief on the appellees’ other claims. The trial court’s order enjoined the Education Defendants from “violat[ing] the Parents’ Bill of Rights by taking action to effect a blanket ban on face mask mandates by local school boards and by denying the school boards their due process rights granted by the statute[,]” and prohibited them from “enforcing or attempting to enforce the Executive Order and the policies it . . . generated and any resulting policy or action which violates the Parents’ Bill of Rights.” The Education Defendants appealed the injunction.  The appellees have now filed a cross-appeal. The appeal automatically stayed it. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.310(b)(2). The appellees moved to vacate the stay, and the trial court granted the request. The Education Defendants then asked this court to reinstate the stay. Because the matter was time sensitive, we issued a preliminary order that quashed the vacatur of the automatic stay and reinstated it pending full appellate review. We now explain the reasoning for our preliminary order. “The purpose of the automatic stay provision . . . is to accord judicial deferenc
10/28/2021 Grant Expediting The Court grants the parties’ joint motion for expedited briefing schedule and review, filed October 22, 2021, and expedites this appeal. Appellees shall serve the answer brief/initial brief on cross-appeal on or before November 2, 2021. Appellants shall serve the reply brief/answer brief on cross-appeal on or before November 15, 2021. Appellees shall serve the reply brief on cross-appeal on or before December 6, 2021. The Court will not grant extensions absent extreme emergency.
11/02/2021 Notice of Appearance Chris W. Altenbernd 0197394 And Designation of E-mail Addresses
11/02/2021 Appellee's Answer Brief Kristin A. Norse 0965634 AB/Cross- IB
11/02/2021 Appendix Kristin A. Norse 0965634 To AB/Cross- IB
11/03/2021 Acknowledgment of Service List      The notice filed by counsel for the Appellee on November 2, 2021, providing e-mail addresses, is acknowledged. However, in addition to filing such notice, counsel of record are responsible for ensuring their primary and/or secondary e-mail addresses under their profile in the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal and eDCA are consistent with the filed notice in order to receive e-mailed notification (Casemail) from the court. Profiles for eDCA users may be updated by clicking on the “My Profile” link and clicking the “Submit” button after making the desired changes.
11/15/2021 Appellant's Reply Brief Michael A. Abel 0075078 Reply/Cross-AB
11/29/2021 Motion To Dismiss Kristin A. Norse 0965634 Joint suggestion of mootness, motion to vacate order on appeal, and motion to dismiss *See Opinion from 12/22/21.*
12/01/2021 Motion To Toll Time Kristin A. Norse 0965634 Motion to toll time for service of cross-reply brief pending order on parties' joint suggestion of mootness
12/22/2021 Dismissed - Per Curiam Opinion The Court dismisses this appeal as moot, vacates the trial court’s order and final judgment, and remands the case to the trial court with directions that the case be dismissed.
12/22/2021 Deny Motion (Other) The Court denies the motion to toll time docketed December 1, 2021, as moot.
01/12/2022 Mandate
01/12/2022 West Publishing