Case ID: so3d_233/html/1290-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Darryl ALLMOND, Appellant, v. DALE CARSON LAW and Samantha Caldwell, Appellees.
    No. 1D17-2622
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
    January 29, 2018
    Darryl Allmond, pro se, Appellant.
    Michael R. D’Lugo of Wicker Smith O’Hara McCoy & Ford, P.A., Orlando, for Appellees.
   Per Curiam.

Upon the court’s own motion, we find that the Initial Brief fails to comply with rule 9.210(b)(1)—(6), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure and that Appellant’s references to ineffective assistance of counsel in the Initial Brief have no application to the summary final judgment entered in the civil action below. Because Appellant demonstrates no preliminary basis for reversal of the order appealed, summary affir-mance is warranted under rule 9.315, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Cabrera v. Outdoor Empire Inc., 134 So.3d 573 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); Spencer v. Fla. Power Light/Broadspire, 141 So.3d 203 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).

Accordingly, the summary final judgment appealed is Affirmed.

Lewis, Osterhaus, and Bilbrey, JJ., concur.