Court Opinion

ID: 9916746
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-10 16:03:08.124484+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:25:54.928944
License: Public Domain

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
                             FOURTH DISTRICT

                        DEVENSON A. WALKER,
                             Appellant,

                                     v.

         ESTATE OF ROBERT YEE, deceased, TED YEE, and
        ALLSTATE FIRE & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,
                          Appellees.

                            No. 4D2023-0366

                            [January 10, 2024]

   Appeal from the County Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit,
Broward County; Tabitha Blackmon, Judge; L.T. Case No. COWE22-
001495.

   Devenson A. Walker, Sunrise, pro se.

   Kansas R. Gooden and Nicholas Ryan Consalvo of Boyd & Jenerette,
P.A., Boca Raton, for appellees Estate of Robert Yee and Ted Yee.

PER CURIAM.

    Appellant, pro se, appeals the final order dismissing his complaint with
prejudice, as well as the order denying his motion to vacate dismissal and
motion for rehearing, after appellant failed to appear at the hearing on the
motion to dismiss. Appellant’s brief cites no legal authority and contains
no citations to the record on appeal. “It is the duty of counsel to prepare
appellate briefs so as to acquaint the Court with the material facts, the
points of law involved, and the legal arguments supporting the positions
of the respective parties.” Polyglycoat Corp. v. Hirsch Distribs., Inc., 442
So. 2d 958, 960 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). “When points, positions, facts and
supporting authorities are omitted from the brief, a court is entitled to
believe that such are waived, abandoned, or deemed by counsel to be
unworthy.” Id. Appellant, as a pro se litigant, was still required to
adequately present his arguments on appeal. Stueber v. Gallagher, 812
So. 2d 454, 457 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (“In Florida, pro se litigants are bound
by the same rules that apply to counsel.”); Kohn v. City of Miami Beach,
611 So. 2d 538, 539 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) (“[I]t is a mistake to hold a pro se
litigant to a lesser standard than a reasonably competent attorney.”);
Figueroa v. Kossiver, 336 So. 3d 1260, 1264 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022) (applying
Polyglycoat principles to a pro se litigant’s brief). The deficiencies in
appellant’s brief mandate affirmance.

   Affirmed.

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., GROSS, and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

                          *         *        *

   Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                                    2