WILLIAM M. WINDSOR
v.
ROBERT KEITH LONGEST, AN INDIVIDUAL AND BOISE CASCADE BUILDING MATERIALS DISTRIBUTION, LLC, A FOREIGN LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
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.
A trial court may bar a pro se litigant from filing further pleadings without attorney representation when the litigant files repetitive, meritless, and abusive pleadings, provided the litigant receives notice and an opportunity to respond.
[1] A trial court may impose a ban on pro se filings by a litigant who has filed repetitive, meritless, and abusive pleadings, provided the litigant receives notice and an op…
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“Although access to the courts is constitutionally guaranteed, a citizen who files repetitive, meritless, and abusive pleadings can forfeit that right if the court gives that litigant notice and an opportunity to respond.”
Court's statement of the legal standard governing pro se filing bans
William M. Windsor, proceeding pro se, filed a certiorari petition challenging multiple orders from the Orange County Circuit Court, including an Apri…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Plenary Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
WILLIAM M. WINDSOR,
Petitioner,
v. Case No. 5D21-942
ROBERT KEITH LONGEST AN INDIVIDUAL
AND BOISE CASCADE BUILDING MATERIALS
DISTRIBUTION, LLC., A FOREIGN LIMITED
LIABILITY COMPANY,
Respondents.
________________________________/
Opinion filed July 30, 2021
Petition for Certiorari Review of the Order from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Jeffrey L. Ashton, Judge.
William M. Windsor, Leesburg, pro se.
No Appearance for Respondents.
EDWARDS, J.
As to the orders rendered February 23, 2021, March 2, 2021, and March3, 2021, Petitioner’s petition for certiorari is dismissed as untimely.
2 Petitions for writ of certiorari, like notices of appeal, must be filed within thirty days of the rendition of the order to be reviewed. See Arce v. Maher Guiley & Maher, P.A., 936 So. 2d 682, 683 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). As to the orders rendered March 24, 2021, March 25, 2021, and April 5, 2021, the petition is dismissed because those are interlocutory orders that can be properly addressed and a remedy provided, if appropriate, on plenary appeal. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.130; Allstate Ins. Co. v. Shupack, 335 So. 2d 620, 621 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1976); Keck v. Eminisor, 104 So. 3d 359, 363–64 (Fla. 2012). As to the trial court’s April 6, 2021 order barring Petitioner from filing any further pro se pleadings in that court, we deny the petition on the merits. We find that the trial court properly balanced Petitioner’s right of access to the courts against the need to prevent a torrent of repetitive, meritless, and abusive pleadings from diverting the court’s limited resources away from the timely adjudication of other cases. Petitioner was given proper notice and the opportunity to respond by showing cause as to why such a ban should not have been imposed before the trial court entered its order. The court’s order forbidding future docketing of Petitioner’s pro se filings unless signed and filed by a member in good standing of The Florida Bar is appropriate
LAMBERT, C.J., and SASSO, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999)
- Andreas Keck v. Ashleigh K. Eminisor, 104 So. 3d 359 (Fla. 2012)
- Bolton v. SE Prop. Holdings, LLC, 127 So. 3d 746 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)
- Rogers v. McDONOUGH, 936 So. 2d 682 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)