GLENDALE FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE, A STATE AGENCY, AND THE HONORABLE BILL GUNTER AS INSURANCE COMMISSIONER AND TREASURER OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ET AL., APPELLEES

Fla. 1st DCA | 1989-01-27
No. 88-2266
SMITH, C.J., and ERVIN and NIMMONS, JJ., concur.
537 So. 2d 1097 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1989) Caution
Cited by 3 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

Glendale Federal Savings and Loan Association and other financial institutions challenged the constitutionality of Florida Statutes section 626.988, which prohibits financial institutions from selling most forms of insurance. The circuit court rejected their constitutional challenges, and the appellants appealed to the First District Court of Appeal.


Holding

The court did not reach the merits of the constitutional challenge in this decision, as the opinion focuses on procedural matters regarding briefing.


Headnotes

[1] Financial institutions in Florida are effectively prohibited from selling most forms of insurance under section 626.988, Florida Statutes.

[2] A motion to exceed the page limitation for appellate briefs may be granted when justified by the complexity of the issues and the parties' efforts to cooperate and presen…

Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“which effectively prohibits financial institutions in this state from selling most forms of insurance”

Describes the statutory provision being challenged as unconstitutional

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Financial institutions in Florida, including Glendale Federal Savings and Loan Association, sought to sell insurance but were prohibited from doing so…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The appellants seek review of an order of the circuit court that rejected their constitutional challenges to section 626.988, Florida Statutes, which effectively prohibits financial institutions in this state from selling most forms of insurance. The appellants have filed a 49 page initial brief and the briefs of the two amici curiae aligned with appellants are 32 and 15 pages in length.

The two appellees and the amicus curiae aligned with them have moved this court for permission to file a combined answer brief and for leave for that brief to exceed the 50 page limitation of Rule 9.210(a)(5), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. We grant the motion and publish our order, taking this opportunity to commend to the appellate bar of this district the procedure employed by the movants. In cases involving multiple parties and/or amici this court is frequently presented with briefs that show little or no attempt at cooperation between counsel for the parties with similar interests. This results in additional work for the judges and staff of this court, and a less effective presentation of the legal arguments at issue. As movants point out, under the appellate rules they technically were entitled to serve separate answer and amicus briefs that could have totaled 150 pages. Instead, they have tendered a 62 page brief that attempts to rebut the arguments of appellants and their amici in a comprehensive and logical manner. Under these circumstances, and given the complexity of the issues presented, we find the request of appellees and their amicus to exceed the page limit to be justified.

MOTION GRANTED.

SMITH, C.J., and ERVIN and NIMMONS, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • State v. Fla. Soc'y OF Ophthalmology, 538 So. 2d 878 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
    …t keep in mind that our heavy workload does not afford time to read several briefs presenting repetitious arguments, and that they should coordinate their briefing. See Glendale Federal Savings and Loan Association v. State, Department of Insurance, 537 So. 2d 1097 (Fla. 1st 1989). . An appellant is “a party who seeks to invoke the appeal jurisdiction of a court.” Rule 9.020(f)(1), Fla.R.App.P.…
  • Glendale Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. State, 587 So. 2d 534 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw