NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING 

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED 

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL 

OF FLORIDA 

SECOND DISTRICT 

RALPH CAFARO, ) 

) 

Appellant, ) 

) 

v. ) Case Nos. 2D15-81 

) 2D15-82 

ESTATE OF DIANE WYLLINS, ) 2D15-83 

Deceased. ) 2D15-85 

) 2D15-87 

Appellee. ) 

) 

) CONSOLIDATED 

________________________________ ) 

Opinion filed May 13, 2015. 

Appeals from the Circuit Court for 

Pasco County. 

Ralph Cafaro, pro se. 

No appearance for Appellee. 

SILBERMAN, Judge. 

These five proceedings were initiated on December 31, 2014, by the filing 

with the circuit court clerk in Pasco County of five sets of documents, each amounting to 

twenty to forty-five pages in length, which the clerk interpreted as attempts to 

commence appeals in this court. We have consolidated the five proceedings for 

purposes of this opinion. 
- 2 - 

None of the documents filed with the circuit clerk included a paper titled 

"notice of appeal" or an order entered by the circuit court. This court's clerk assigned an 

appellate case number to each proceeding, but the absence of orders being appealed 

prevented the court from ascertaining its jurisdiction. Accordingly, on January 9, 2015, 

this court issued two orders in each appeal directing the appellant, Ralph Cafaro, to 

show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed as untimely and why it should not 

be dismissed for failure to provide a copy of the order appealed as required by Florida 

Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.110(d). Although Mr. Cafaro subsequently filed 

additional papers in each appeal, they were not responsive to the orders to show cause, 

and no trial court orders to be appealed were included with the papers. We therefore 

dismiss each appeal for Mr. Cafaro's failure to provide an order that would demonstrate 

this court's jurisdiction over the respective appeal. 

We note further that these appeals follow a series of fifty proceedings that 

Mr. Cafaro has filed in this court beginning in 2010. Forty-nine of these have been 

dismissed, the vast majority for failure to file a copy of an order to be appealed. 

Accordingly, on February 2, 2015, this court issued an additional order under the five 

case numbers reflected in this opinion, directing Mr. Cafaro to show cause why he 

should not be prohibited from instituting civil appeals or original proceedings in this court 

unless submitted by a licensed attorney. As we explained in that order: 

Mr. Cafaro's repeated submissions of mostly indecipherable 

documents in large volume tax the limited resources of this 

court's clerk and his staff, as well as the court's staff 

attorneys and judges. Very few of his cases ever reach the 

briefing stage. It appears that Mr. Cafaro harbors the belief 

that the submission of a notice of appeal along with pages of 

circuit court pleadings, his own commentary, and other 

documents fulfills his requirements to perfect an appeal. 
- 3 - 

The lengthy submissions seeking review of either old or 

unidentified circuit court activity consume an inordinate 

amount of the time of the court's staff, causing delay in 

servicing the appeals brought by other litigants who respect 

the need to comply with the appellate rules and who seek 

timely review of appealable circuit court orders. With each 

appeal, judicial labor is required to determine the propriety of 

dismissing his proceedings for failing to follow simple orders 

from this court. All dismissals were preceded by orders 

directing him to remedy shortcomings in the appeals or 

otherwise address concerns of the court regarding 

jurisdiction. 

In response, Mr. Cafaro has filed a fifteen-page document that appears to set forth a 

history of past lawsuits but is otherwise nonresponsive to the order. Because we have 

determined that his frivolous and repetitious filings burden the resources of this court, 

see Werdell v. State, 16 So. 3d 875, 877 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009), Ralph Cafaro is, as of the 

date this opinion becomes final, prohibited from initiating any civil appeals or original 

proceedings in this court unless they are submitted by a member in good standing of 

The Florida Bar. See Broom v. Tucker, 94 So. 3d 502, 504 (Fla. 2012). The clerk of 

this court is directed to deposit any submissions from Mr. Cafaro that may otherwise 

qualify to be treated as civil appeals or original proceedings in an inactive file that shall 

receive no judicial consideration. 

Appeals 2D15-81, 2D15-82, 2D15-83, 2D15-85, and 2D15-87 are 

dismissed. 

ALTENBERND and MORRIS, JJ., Concur.