Title: A.C. v. Dep't of Children and Families

State: florida

Issuer: Florida Supreme Court

Document:

Supreme Court of Florida 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC22-1519 
____________ 
 
A.C., etc., 
Petitioner, 
 
vs. 
 
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, 
Respondent. 
 
February 2, 2023 
 
PER CURIAM. 
This case is before the Court on the petition of A.C. for a writ 
of mandamus.  We have jurisdiction.  See art. V, § 3(b)(8), Fla. 
Const. 
Petitioner has filed forty-one pro se petitions or notices with 
this Court since August 29, 2022.  On November 18, 2022, we 
denied the instant petition, expressly retained jurisdiction, and 
ordered Petitioner to show cause why she should not be barred 
from filing further pro se requests for relief in this Court related to 
circuit court case number 502020DP000123XXXXMB.  A.C. v. Dep’t 
- 2 - 
 
of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1519, 2022 WL 17076781 (Fla. Nov. 
18, 2022).  Petitioner requested an extension of time to file a 
response to the show cause order, which we granted on November 
22, 2022.  Since that time, Petitioner has continued to file 
numerous meritless pleadings in this Court, including various 
motions to dismiss the show cause order.  In her response to the 
show cause order, Petitioner acknowledges she has filed numerous 
pleadings in this Court but argues she must challenge the lower 
tribunals’ orders.  Neither Petitioner’s response nor her motions 
contain any justification for her continued abuse of this Court’s 
limited resources by filing numerous meritless pro se notices and 
petitions.  Accordingly, we now find that Petitioner has failed to 
show cause why she should not be sanctioned, and we outline 
those sanctions below. 
Petitioner has demonstrated a pattern of filing meritless pro se 
requests for relief in this Court.  Including the petition in the 
instant case, Petitioner has filed forty-one pro se petitions or notices 
with this Court since August 29, 2022.1  Twenty-four of those cases 
 
1.  See A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1631 (Fla. 
Dec. 2, 2022) (notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction dismissed); 
- 3 - 
 
 
A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1371 (Fla. Oct. 24, 2022) 
(mandamus petition dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. 
SC22-1369 (Fla. Oct. 24, 2022) (mandamus petition dismissed); 
A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1302 (Fla. Oct. 6, 2022) 
(notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t 
of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1296 (Fla. Oct. 4, 2022) (notice to 
invoke discretionary jurisdiction dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & 
Fam., No. SC22-1295 (Fla. Oct. 17, 2022) (mandamus petition 
dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1290 (Fla. Oct. 
4, 2022) (notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction dismissed); A.C. 
v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1285 (Fla. Oct. 3, 2022) (notice 
to invoke discretionary jurisdiction dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t of 
Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1282 (Fla. Dec. 5, 2022) (notice to invoke 
discretionary jurisdiction dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 
No. SC22-1281 (Fla. Oct. 3, 2022) (notice to invoke discretionary 
jurisdiction dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-
1279 (Fla. Dec. 5, 2022) (notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction 
dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1261, 2022 
WL 4533802 (Fla. Sept. 28, 2022) (notice to invoke discretionary 
jurisdiction dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-
1259 (Fla. Dec. 5, 2022) (notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction 
dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1156 (Fla. 
Sept. 1, 2022) (notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction 
dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1153 (Fla. 
Aug. 31, 2022) (notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction 
dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1149 (Fla. 
Aug. 31, 2022) (notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction 
dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1145 (Fla. 
Aug. 30, 2022) (notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction 
dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1143 (Fla. 
Aug. 30, 2022) (notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction 
dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1142 (Fla. Oct. 
24, 2022) (notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction voluntarily 
dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1405 (Fla. Nov. 
10, 2022) (mandamus petition voluntarily dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t 
of Child. & Fams., No. SC22-1406 (Fla. Nov. 10, 2022) (mandamus 
petition voluntarily dismissed); A.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., No. 
- 4 - 
 
involved circuit court case number 502020DP000123XXXXMB.  To 
date, the Court has disposed of thirty-three of Petitioner’s cases, 
including five petitions that Petitioner voluntarily dismissed.  This 
Court has never granted Petitioner the relief sought in any of her 
filings.  Petitioner’s thirty-three petitions and notices were all denied 
or dismissed. 
Therefore, based on Petitioner’s extensive history of filing pro 
se petitions and requests for relief that were meritless or otherwise 
inappropriate for this Court’s review, we now find that she has 
abused this Court’s limited judicial resources.  See Pettway v. 
McNeil, 987 So. 2d 20, 22 (Fla. 2008) (explaining that this Court 
has previously “exercised the inherent judicial authority to sanction 
an abusive litigant” and that “[o]ne justification for such a sanction 
lies in the protection of the rights of others to have the Court 
conduct timely reviews of their legitimate filings”).  If no action is 
taken, Petitioner will continue to burden this Court’s resources. 
Accordingly, we direct the Clerk of this Court to reject any 
future pleadings or other requests for relief submitted by Petitioner 
 
SC22-1411 (Fla. Nov. 14, 2022) (mandamus petition voluntarily 
dismissed). 
- 5 - 
 
regarding circuit court case number 502020DP000123XXXXMB, 
unless such filings are signed by a member in good standing of The 
Florida Bar. 
Furthermore, because Petitioner persists in filing meritless 
pleadings regarding other circuit court cases as well, we order 
Petitioner to show cause, within three (3) days of the date hereof, 
why she should not be barred from filing any pro se pleadings, 
motions, or other requests for relief in this Court, unless such 
filings are signed by a member of The Florida Bar in good standing. 
Petitioner’s “Writ of Mandamus,” which the Court has treated 
as a motion for written opinion, as well as any other pending 
motions or requests for relief are all hereby denied. 
No motion for rehearing or clarification will be entertained by 
this Court. 
It is so ordered. 
MUÑIZ, C.J., and CANADY, POLSTON, LABARGA, COURIEL, 
GROSSHANS, and FRANCIS, JJ., concur. 
 
Original Proceeding – Mandamus 
 
Angela Ciriello, pro se, West Palm Beach, Florida, 
 
for Petitioner 
 
- 6 - 
 
Andrew Feigenbaum of the Florida Department of Children and 
Families, West Palm Beach, Florida, 
 
for Respondent