Court Opinion

ID: 9903601
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-27 15:55:31.048554+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:11.920958
License: Public Domain

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

JAMES LYONS,

            Petitioner,

 v.                                          Case No. 5D22-2071
                                             LT Case No. 2020-DR-000632

LAURA M. STEINER,

          Respondent.
________________________________/

Opinion filed January 23, 2023

Petition for Certiorari Review of Orders
from the Circuit Court for Flagler County,
Christopher A. France, Judge.

James Lyons, Palm Coast, pro se.

Julia H. McLaughlin, of Owenby Law,
P.A., St. Augustine, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

      James Lyons petitions this court for the issuance of a writ of certiorari.

He contends that the trial court erred when it barred him from further pro se

filings in his post-final judgment paternity proceeding without first providing
him with notice and an opportunity to be heard before imposing this

sanction. 1 See State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47, 48 (Fla. 1999) (stating that

a court must first provide notice and an opportunity to be heard before barring

a pro se party from future filings).

      This court has recently granted certiorari relief to a pro se party when

the trial court prohibited the litigant from future pro se filings without first

complying with the Spencer procedure of issuing an order to show cause

providing the litigant with reasonable notice and an opportunity to respond

before imposing this sanction. See McCone v. Pitney Bowes, Inc., 342 So.

3d 826, 827 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022). Because the trial court here did not follow

this procedure, we grant the petition and quash, without prejudice, that part

of the respective orders barring Lyons from pro se filings. 2

      PETITION GRANTED; ORDERS QUASHED.

LAMBERT, C.J., EVANDER and HARRIS, JJ., concur.

      1
         Lyons also sought certiorari review of that aspect of one order
restricting his timesharing with his minor child. Lyons subsequently withdrew
this claim.
      2
        The trial court may reconsider whether to bar Lyons from future pro
se filings; but if it does so, the court must comply with the procedural
requirement of issuing an order to show cause that gives Lyons both
reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard. We take no position on
the merits of whether Lyons should be barred from future pro se filings below.

                                       2