MAISHA HILL
v.
RANDY MERRIT, NIKKI RAY, IGHAL GOLDFARB, AND DEIGO B. GOLDFARB

Fla. 5th DCA | 2025-06-13
No. 2024-0955
Edwards, C.J., Lambert, J., Soud, J., Eckley-Moulder, J.
2025 FL 4938 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2025)

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.


Holding

A party engaging in repetitive and frivolous pro se filings attacking a final judgment may be prohibited from future pro se filings in that case to conserve judicial resources.


Headnotes

[1] A court may prohibit a party from filing further pro se pleadings in a case when the party engages in repetitive and frivolous filings that constitute an abuse of the jud…

Previewing 1 of 1 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

“Enough is enough.”

Court's citation to Isley v. State in support of imposing sanctions for abuse of process

Facts & Procedural History

Maisha Hill filed repetitive and frivolous pro se pleadings attacking the final judgment of dismissal in a Duval County Court case. The court issued a…

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.


Per_curiam
Per Curiam

FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________ Case No. 5D2024-0955 LT Case No. 2023-CC-005783 _____________________________ MAISHA HILL, Appellant, v. RANDY MERRITT, NIKKI RAY,

IGHAL GOLDFARB, AND DEIGO B.

GOLDFARB, Appellees. _____________________________ On appeal from the County Court for Duval County. Kelly Eckley-Moulder, Judge. Maisha Hill, Charlotte, NC, pro se. Dale G. Westling, of Dale G. Westling,Sr., PA, Jacksonville, for Appellees. June 13, 2025

PER CURIAM.

Due to Appellant’s apparent abuse of the legal process by her repetitive and frivolous pro se filings attacking the final judgment of dismissal entered in Duval County Court Case Number 2023- CC-005783, this Court issued an order dated May 19, 2025, directing Appellant to show cause why she should not be prohibited from future pro se filings in this case. Having carefully

2 considered the response and finding it fails to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed, we conclude that Appellant is abusing the judicial process and should be barred from further pro se filings in this case. In order to conserve judicial resources, Appellant is prohibited from filing with this Court any further pro se filings concerning Duval County Court Case No. 2023-CC-005783. The Clerk of this Court is directed not to accept any further pro se filings concerning the referenced case. The Clerk will summarily reject any future filings regarding the referenced case unless filed by a member in good standing of The Florida Bar. See Isley v. State, 652 So. 2d 409, 411 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (“Enough is enough.”).

APPELLANT PROHIBITED.

EDWARDS, C.J., and LAMBERT and SOUD, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw