|
Date Docketed
|
Description
|
Filed By
|
Notes
|
|
04/09/2020
|
Notice of Appeal Filed
|
Daniel W. Uhlfelder 133922
|
|
|
04/09/2020
|
Order Appealed
|
|
|
|
04/09/2020
|
Notice of Appeal Transmittal Form
|
Gwen Marshall
|
|
|
04/13/2020
|
Notice of Appeal / Acknowledgement letter
|
|
Notice of Appeal from the lower tribunal reflecting a filing date of April 8, 2020.
|
|
04/15/2020
|
Appeal-Pay Fee/Submit LT Ord of Insolv ($300)
|
|
Appellant has filed a notice of appeal in the lower tribunal without the entry of an order of insolvency or deposit of the statutory filing fee. Accordingly, Appellant 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 $300.00 as the appellate filing fee required by the applicable rule of procedure and Section 35.22(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2018). If Appellant seeks a waiver of the filing fee on the grounds of indigency, Appellant 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.
This appeal shall not 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 this case without further opportunity to be heard. Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.410.
|
|
04/17/2020
|
Docketing Statement
|
|
|
|
05/15/2020
|
CASE FILING FEE PAID THROUGH PORTAL
|
|
|
|
06/19/2020
|
Motion (Other)
|
Nicholas A. Primrose 0104804
|
Motion for Order to Show Cause
|
|
06/19/2020
|
Received Records
|
Gwen Marshall
|
898 pages
|
|
06/23/2020
|
Initial Brf - 20-Day SC or Dismiss
|
|
Appellant has failed to timely file the initial brief. Within 20 days from the date of this order, appellant shall file the initial brief or, alternatively, show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for failure to comply with the rules and orders of this Court. The failure to timely comply with this order will result in dismissal of this case without further opportunity to be heard. Fla. R. App. P. 9.410.
|
|
06/25/2020
|
Deny Motion (Other)
|
|
In light of the Court’s order of June 23, 2020, Appellee’s motion for order to show cause, filed June 19, 2020, is denied as moot.
|
|
07/13/2020
|
Initial Brief on Merits
|
Daniel W. Uhlfelder 133922
|
|
|
07/15/2020
|
Appellee's Answer Brief
|
Nicholas A. Primrose 0104804
|
|
|
07/15/2020
|
Motion (Other)
|
Nicholas A. Primrose 0104804
|
motion to dispense with OA and for expedited opinion
|
|
07/29/2020
|
RESPONSE
|
Daniel W. Uhlfelder 133922
|
AA's Response to Motion to Dispense with OA and for an Expedited Opinion
|
|
08/05/2020
|
Order
|
|
The Court notes that the order on appeal is not final or appealable, because it merely grants a motion to dismiss and does not actually dismiss the case. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(l); Dedge v. Crosby, 914 So. 2d 1055, 1056 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (“[A]n order granting a motion to dismiss with prejudice is no more final than an order granting a motion to dismiss without prejudice.”); Johnson v. First City Bank of Gainesville, 491 So. 2d 1217, 1218 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) (finding that an order that granted a motion to dismiss “with prejudice” without dismissing the case is not final and not appealable).
On the Court’s own motion, we exercise our discretion to relinquish jurisdiction to the lower tribunal for 20 days for entry of a final, appealable order that actually dismisses the case and does not merely grant a motion. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(l). Appellant shall obtain such a final order and promptly file an amended notice of appeal directly with the clerk of this Court, attaching the final order.
Failure to comply timely with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions, which may include dismissal of the appeal, without further opportunity to be heard. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.410.
This order tolls further proceedings until the final, appealable order is filed with this Court.
|
|
08/17/2020
|
Motion To Withdraw as Counsel
|
Nicholas A. Primrose 0104804
|
Motion for Leave to Withdraw as Counsel for Governor DeSantis
|
|
08/17/2020
|
Notice of Appearance
|
Joshua Elliott Pratt 0119347
|
|
|
08/25/2020
|
Motion for Extension of Time to File Response
|
Daniel W. Uhlfelder 133922
|
Response and Motion for Extension of time to Respond to Court's Order of August 5, 2020.
|
|
09/08/2020
|
Grant Withdrawal of Appellee's Counsel
|
|
The motion to withdraw filed on August 17, 2020, by Nicholas A. Primrose, is granted. Mr. Primrose shall have no further obligations in this case, but Appellee shall continue to be represented by Joshua E. Pratt.
|
|
09/14/2020
|
Amended Notice of Appeal
|
Daniel W. Uhlfelder 133922
|
8/27/20 corrected order attached
|
|
09/18/2020
|
Grant EOT Response to Court Order
|
|
Appellant’s motion for extension of time, filed August 25, 2020, is granted, and the Court accepts the amended notice of appeal filed September 14, 2020.
Appellant may file a reply brief within 30 days of the date of this order.
Appellee’s motion to dispense with oral argument and for an expedited opinion, filed July 15, 2020, is granted in part. This case is hereby accorded expedited review. No further extensions of time on briefs shall be granted. The Court will render a decision concerning oral argument, if it is requested, at a later date.
|
|
10/13/2020
|
Motion To Withdraw as Counsel
|
Ryan Newman 1031451
|
|
|
10/19/2020
|
Motion For Oral Argument
|
Daniel W. Uhlfelder 133922
|
|
|
10/30/2020
|
Grant Withdrawal of Appellee's Counsel
|
|
The motion to withdraw filed on October 13, 2020, by Joseph W. Jacquot, is granted. Mr. Jacquot shall have no further obligations in this case, and Appellee shall continue to be represented by Joshua E. Pratt.
|
|
11/13/2020
|
OA Denied
|
|
Appellant's motion for oral argument docketed October 19, 2020, is denied.
|
|
11/13/2020
|
Order
|
|
The court has reviewed the briefs and other filings in this case and finds that the appellant fails to demonstrate even an arguable legal basis for reversal. Accordingly, we summarily affirm pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.315. Moreover, the appellant shall show cause within fifteen days why this court should not impose sanctions, including attorney fees and costs, on him and counsel for filing this appeal, the initial brief, and the request for oral argument, which appear to be frivolous and/or filed in bad faith. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.410; cf. s. 57.105, Fla. Stat.
|
|
11/13/2020
|
Affirmed - Per Curiam Opinion
|
|
Affirmed by order
|
|
11/30/2020
|
RESPONSE
|
Daniel W. Uhlfelder 133922
|
|
|
12/02/2020
|
Order
|
|
Appellee Governor Ron DeSantis is permitted to file a reply to Appellant's
Response to this Court's Order to Show Cause by December 16, 2020.
|
|
12/08/2020
|
Notice of Appearance
|
Colleen M. Ernst 112903
|
|
|
12/11/2020
|
REPLY
|
Joshua Elliott Pratt 0119347
|
Governor's Reply to Response to Order to Show Cause
|
|
02/05/2021
|
Order
|
|
We summarily affirmed this appeal because Appellant’s briefs merely expressed disagreement with Governor Ron DeSantis on non-justiciable policy questions arising out of the Governor’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This was an improper use of the appeal process, as Appellant sought merely to express an opinion regarding political and public-policy matters lying within the Governor’s discretion. We ordered Appellant and his counsel, all of whom appeared on the briefs, to show cause why they should not be sanctioned for taking a frivolous appeal and filing frivolous briefs.
In response, Appellant and his counsel merely repeat the arguments we have already found frivolous. They blame the trial court for suggesting that they appeal its order, even though the judge clearly ruled that Appellant had failed to raise any justiciable issue.
Appellant presented no good-faith argument rooted in existing law and no good-faith argument for the modification, extension, or reversal of existing law. Appellant and his counsel knew or should have known that their appeal was not rooted in the law and that their briefs merely stated their opinion without relying on good-faith, reasonably arguable citations to any legal authority for reversal. In so doing, they improperly consumed this court’s resources as well as those of the Governor and his staff.
The district court of appeal exists to resolve any bona fide dispute between parties over whether there has been a cognizable legal error committed by a trial court affecting a disposition brought before us for review. A court such as this does not hear public-policy grievances or resolve political disputes. So, when a lawyer—who is an officer of the court—brings an appeal as counsel of record, the lawyer must make a good-faith argument as to why the trial court erred based on either existing law or a proposed reasonable extension of the law.
As the rules governing a lawyer’s conduct states:
The filing of an action or defense or similar action taken for a client is not frivolous merely because the facts have not first been fully substantiated or because the lawyer expects to develop vital evidence only by discovery. What is required of lawyers, however, is that they inform themselves about the facts of their clients’ cases and the applicable law and determine that they can make good faith arguments in support of their clients’ positions. Such action is not frivolous even though the lawyer believes that the client's position ultimately will not prevail. The action is frivolous, however, if the lawyer is unable either to make a good faith argument on the merits of the action taken or to support the action taken by a good faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law.
Comment to R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-3.1 (emphasis added).
This appeal, together with Appellant’s brief, did not comport with this foundational expectation of professionalism and candor to the court. Indeed, Appellant and his counsel abused the judicial process. Appellant later admitted publicly that he filed this action to “draw attention” to political issues, not to vindicate legal rights. Appellant stated as follows in an op-ed:
As a native Floridian and attorney who has fought for equal justice and consumer protection my whole life, I have gone to great lengths to draw attention to how badly Gov. Ron DeSantis has mishandled this health crisis, going so far as to sue him to issue a temporary stay-at-home and beach closure order.
Daniel Uhlfelder, Florida COVID-19 cases have hit tragic milestone, The Gainesville Sun, Dec. 2, 2020, https://www.gainesville.com/story/opinion/2020/12/02/daniel-uhlfelder-florida-covid-19-cases-have-hit-tragic-milestone/3784434001 (newspaper column published while show-cause sanctions order was pending).
In addition, Appellant and his counsel’s failure to comply with the appellate rules demonstrates a lack of seriousness about these proceedings,
|
|
02/08/2021
|
Order
|
|
Pursuant to Rule 3-7.8, Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, the Court directs the State Attorney for the First Judicial Circuit, in the name of the State of Florida, to file a motion to discipline Daniel W. Uhlfelder, the respondent attorney, for the following putatively unprofessional conduct that has been made known to the First District Court of Appeal:
On February 6, 2021, following an order of this court issued February 5, 2021, referring the respondent attorney for possible misconduct to The Florida Bar in Case No. 1D20-1178, the respondent attorney was quoted by the Tallahassee Democrat as stating: “I do find it interesting that this opinion attacking my critiques of Gov. DeSantis appeared just two days after I launched a (political) committee to remove Ron DeSantis[.”]
This statement may violate Rules of Professional Conduct 4-8.2 and 4-8.4; the statement may also violate the Oath of Admission to The Florida Bar, and also may constitute indirect criminal contempt.
A copy of this order has been delivered to The Florida Bar, along with the February 5, 2021, order.
B.L. THOMAS, KELSEY, and TANENBAUM, JJ., concur.
|
|
03/22/2021
|
Order
|
|
The State Attorney of the First Judicial Circuit shall file a status report with this court within 15 days, describing all action taken to comply with this court’s order dated February 8, 2021. Specifically, the State Attorney shall address whether she has filed a motion, as directed, “in the name of the State of Florida to discipline [Daniel W. Uhlfelder], setting forth in the motion” the conduct described by this court in the February 8 order, including the comments about this court attributed to Mr. Uhlfelder in media reports. If the State Attorney has not yet filed that motion as directed, the report shall provide the date by which she intends to file it. If she has already filed the motion, the report shall state as much and attach a copy of both the motion and Mr. Uhlfelder’s answer. The report also shall indicate when there will be held the evidentiary hearing required by rule 3-7.8, Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, for determining the matter. The State Attorney shall file an updated status report no later than every 30 days thereafter until proceedings have concluded with the circuit court’s ultimate disposition, which shall be filed with this court promptly.
|
|
03/30/2021
|
Notice of Appearance
|
Anne Izzo 1016166
|
(And Designation of E-mail Addresses)
|
|
03/30/2021
|
Acknowledgment of Service List
|
|
The notice filed by counsel for the Appellee on March 30, 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.
|
|
03/30/2021
|
Status Report
|
|
|
|
04/21/2021
|
Status Report
|
|
Second Status Report
|
|
05/21/2021
|
Status Report
|
|
Third Status Report
|
|
06/14/2021
|
Status Report
|
|
4th Status Report
|
|
07/19/2021
|
Status Report
|
|
Fifth Status Report
|
|
08/19/2021
|
Status Report
|
|
Sixth Status Report
|
|
09/20/2021
|
Status Report
|
|
Seventh Status Report
|
|
10/19/2021
|
Status Report
|
|
Eighth Status Report
|
|
11/17/2021
|
Status Report
|
|
Ninth Status Report
|
|
12/17/2021
|
Status Report
|
|
Tenth Status Report
|
|
01/14/2022
|
Notice of Appearance
|
Brian Updike 1022516
|
and designation of email addresses
|
|
01/14/2022
|
Acknowledgment of Service List
|
|
The notice filed by counsel for the Appellee on January 14, 2022, 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.
|
|
01/14/2022
|
Status Report
|
|
11th Status Report
|
|
02/11/2022
|
Status Report
|
|
12th status report
|
|
03/18/2022
|
Status Report
|
|
13th status report
|
|
04/11/2022
|
Notice of Appearance
|
Robert Paul Gillespie 0121848
|
and designation of email addresses
|
|
04/11/2022
|
Status Report
|
|
14th status report
|
|
04/12/2022
|
Acknowledgment of Service List
|
|
The Notice of Appearance and Designation of Email Addresses for E-Service filed by counsel for the Appellee on April 11, 2022, 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.
|
|
05/10/2022
|
Status Report
|
|
15th status report
|
|
06/09/2022
|
Status Report
|
|
16th
|
|
07/08/2022
|
Status Report
|
|
|
|
08/08/2022
|
Status Report
|
|
18th
|
|
08/29/2022
|
Notice of Appearance
|
Nicholas John Peter Meros 0120270
|
|
|
08/29/2022
|
Motion To Withdraw as Counsel
|
Joshua Elliott Pratt 0119347
|
|
|
09/08/2022
|
Status Report
|
|
19th
|
|
09/16/2022
|
Grant Withdrawal of Appellee's Counsel
|
|
The motion to withdraw as counsel for appellee docketed August 29, 2022, by Joshua E. Pratt, Esquire, is granted.
|
|
10/07/2022
|
Status Report
|
|
20th
|
|
11/07/2022
|
Status Report
|
|
21st
|
|
12/07/2022
|
Status Report
|
|
22nd
|
|
01/06/2023
|
Status Report
|
|
23rd
|
|
02/06/2023
|
Status Report
|
|
24th
|
