Title: In Re: Amendments to Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.130 and 9.200
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: SC18-2011
State: Florida
Issuer: Florida Supreme Court
Date: January 30, 2020

Supreme Court of Florida 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC18-2011 
____________ 
 
 
IN RE:  AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA RULES OF APPELLATE 
PROCEDURE 9.130 AND 9.200. 
 
January 30, 2020 
 
PER CURIAM. 
The Court has for consideration an out-of-cycle report proposing 
amendments to Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.130 (Proceedings to 
Review Nonfinal Orders and Specified Final Orders) and 9.200 (The Record) filed 
by The Florida Bar’s Appellate Court Rules Committee (Committee).  See Fla. R. 
Jud. Admin. 2.140(e)(2).  We have jurisdiction.1 
The Florida Bar Board of Governors unanimously approved the proposals.  
The Committee published the proposals for comment before filing them with the 
Court, but no comments were received.  The Court published the proposals for 
comments after they were filed and received one comment from the Florida Court 
Clerks and Comptrollers pertaining to the Committee’s proposals to amend rule 
                                          
 
 
1.  See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const. 
 
- 2 - 
9.200.  Additionally, upon order of the Court, the Committee filed a supplemental 
report addressing its proposed amendments to rule 9.200.  After reviewing the 
Committee’s proposals and considering the comment filed, the Committee’s 
response, and the supplemental report, we adopt the Committee’s amendments as 
proposed.  We discuss the amendments below. 
AMENDMENTS 
 
First, we amend rule 9.130 (Proceedings to Review Nonfinal Orders and 
Specified Final Orders) to add a new subdivision (a)(3)(C)(x), which creates a new 
type of appealable nonfinal order for permanent guardianships for dependent 
children pursuant to section 39.6221, Florida Statutes.  According to the 
Committee’s report, the Committee proposed amending rule 9.130 in light of this 
Court’s opinion in M.M. v. Florida Department of Children and Families, 189 So. 
3d 134 (Fla. 2016).  In that case, we considered the proper standard of review for 
post-dependency orders that anticipate future modification and held that “the 
legally required and the common sense approach to such post-dependency orders is 
review by certiorari.”  189 So. 3d at 137.  We also emphasized that “[i]f the non-
final order is not listed under rule 9.130, the review must come by certiorari.”  Id. 
at 137-38.  In its report, the Committee explains that since this decision, appellate 
courts have treated orders establishing permanent guardianships for dependent 
children pursuant to section 39.6221, Florida Statutes, as nonfinal orders 
 
- 3 - 
reviewable only by certiorari.  Thus, the Committee proposes amending rule 9.130 
to include a new type of nonfinal appealable order for permanent guardianships 
established for dependent children pursuant to section 39.6221, Florida Statutes, 
that would otherwise not be appealable under this Court’s holding in M.M. v. 
Florida Department of Children and Families.  Accordingly, we now amend rule 
9.130 to create a new subdivision (a)(3)(C)(x), which would permit appellate 
review of this type of nonfinal order. 
Furthermore, we amend rule 9.200 (The Record) to address a concern raised 
by the Committee that heavily redacted records on appeal are increasingly 
common.  The Committee explains in its report that often portions of the record are 
redacted unnecessarily and sometimes to the extent that the record is unreadable.  
To receive a less-redacted, usable version of the record, attorneys have been 
required to get orders directing the trial court clerks to transmit an unredacted 
version of the record.  Thus, we now amend rule 9.200 to enable attorneys and 
parties to obtain unredacted records on appeal without having to obtain a court 
order from the district courts in every case.  
Specifically, we first delete the second and third sentences in subdivision 
(d)(1)(C), which required that the PDF file of the record include all filings in their 
redacted form and that the unredacted version of any information in the record be 
provided to the appellate court upon request.  We next amend rule 9.200 by adding 
 
- 4 - 
a new subdivision (d)(3) that contains all the requirements pertaining to the 
redacted record, and we renumber existing subdivisions (d)(3) and (d)(4) as (d)(4) 
and (d)(5), respectively.  We move the existing requirement that the clerk of the 
lower tribunal certify the record from the existing subdivision (d)(3) to the new 
subdivision (d)(3).  The new subdivision (d)(3) also requires that the clerk of the 
lower tribunal redact the PDF files of the record and transcript and transmit the 
redacted PDF files to the court.  Further, the subdivision allows the unredacted 
version of the record on appeal to be requested, without filing formal notice, to the 
extent permitted for access by the requestor.  As the Committee explains in its 
report, the “extent permitted” language is meant to ensure that the requirements of 
the Florida Courts Technology Commission’s Access Security Matrix are still 
followed.  Additionally, these amendments allow the unredacted record and 
transcript to be sent to the counsel of record or pro se party by “standing agreement 
with the clerk of the lower tribunal,” permitting offices such as the appellate public 
defenders to obtain the unredacted records in all its cases without making 
individual requests. 
Accordingly, the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure are amended as 
reflected in the appendix to this opinion.  New language is indicated by 
underscoring, and deletions are indicated by struck-through type.  The amendments 
shall become effective on April 1, 2020, at 12:01 a.m. 
 
- 5 - 
It is so ordered. 
CANADY, C.J., and POLSTON, LABARGA, LAWSON, and MUÑIZ, JJ., 
concur. 
 
THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR REHEARING SHALL NOT ALTER THE 
EFFECTIVE DATE OF THESE AMENDMENTS. 
 
Original Proceeding – Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 
 
Thomas D. Hall, Chair, and Courtney Rebecca Brewer, Past Chair, Appellate 
Court Rules Committee, Tallahassee, Florida; and Joshua E. Doyle, Executive 
Director, and Krys Godwin, Staff Liaison, The Florida Bar, Tallahassee, Florida, 
 
 
for Petitioner 
 
Douglas D. Sunshine, Chief Legal Officer, Florida Court Clerks & Comptrollers, 
Tallahassee, Florida, 
 
 
Responding with comments 
 
 
- 6 - 
 
 
APPENDIX 
RULE 9.130. 
PROCEEDINGS TO REVIEW NONFINAL ORDERS 
AND SPECIFIED FINAL ORDERS 
(a) 
Applicability. 
(1) – (2) 
[No Change] 
(3) 
Appeals to the district courts of appeal of nonfinal orders are 
limited to those that: 
(A) – (B) 
[No Change] 
(C) 
determine: 
(i) – (vii) 
[No Change] 
(viii) the issue of forum non conveniens; or 
(ix) 
that, as a matter of law, a settlement agreement is 
unenforceable, is set aside, or never existed.; or 
(x) 
that a permanent guardianship shall be established 
for a dependent child pursuant to section 39.6221, Florida Statutes. 
(D) – (F) 
[No Change] 
 (4) – (5) 
[No Change] 
(b) -  (i) 
[No Change] 
Committee Notes 
[No Change] 
 
 
- 7 - 
 
 
RULE 9.200. 
THE RECORD 
(a) – (c) 
[No Change] 
(d) 
Preparation and Transmission of Electronic Record. 
(1) 
The clerk of the lower tribunal shall prepare the record as 
follows: 
(A) – (B) 
[No Change] 
(C) 
The entire record, except for the transcript of the trial, 
shall be compiled into a single PDF file. The PDF file shall include all filings in 
their redacted form. The unredacted version of any information in the record shall 
be provided to the appellate court upon request. The PDF file shall be:  
(i) – (iii) 
[No Change] 
(2) 
[No Change] 
(3) 
The clerk of the lower tribunal shall certify the record, redact 
the PDF files of the record and the transcript of the trial pursuant to Florida Rule of 
Judicial Administration 2.420(d), and transmit the redacted PDF files to the court 
by the method described in subdivision (d)(4) of this rule. By request or standing 
agreement with the clerk of the lower tribunal, counsel of record or a pro se party 
may obtain the record and the transcript of the trial that are unredacted to the extent 
permitted for access by the requestor. No formal motion shall be required. The 
clerk of the lower tribunal shall certify the less redacted record and transmit the 
PDF files to the court by the method described in subdivision (d)(4) of this rule or 
file a notice of inability to complete or transmit the record, specifying the reason.  
(34) The clerk of the lower tribunal shall certify the record and 
transmit the record and the transcript of the trial to the court by uploading the PDF 
files: 
(A) – (B) 
[No Change] 
(45) The court shall upload the electronic record to the electronic 
filing (e-filing) system docket. Attorneys and those parties who are registered users 
of the court’s e-filing system may download the electronic record in their case(s). 
 
- 8 - 
 
 
(e) – (f) 
[No Change] 
Committee Notes 
[No Change]