Partner
In Wellons v. Broward Water Consultants, Inc. (3D25-0146), out of the Third District Court of Appeal, the court upheld a trial judge’s ruling that refused to consider an untimely-filed summary judgment response brief — even though the brief would have been timely under the prior version of the rule.
The case involved a party who submitted a responsive filing just a few days before a scheduled hearing. Under the older rule, the submission would have likely been timely. But the newly revised procedural timeline required earlier filing.
The trial court exercised its discretion and declined to consider the brief, and there was no discussion of its merit or excuses for the late filing. Instead, the court proceeded to treat the facts asserted in the motion as undisputed and granted summary judgment.
On appeal, the Third DCA affirmed, emphasizing that, like your 5th grade teacher, trial courts have broad discretion to disregard a late submission.
Takeaway: Litigators must stay current on procedural deadlines. As rule amendments take effect, older norms no longer offer protection.
At Boatman Ricci, we stay on top of rule changes and procedural reforms and help trial teams adapt quickly to avoid problems.
* * * * * * * * * *
THIS BLOG IS INTENDED FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY. IT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE. THE READER SHOULD CONSULT WITH KNOWLEDGEABLE LEGAL COUNSEL TO DETERMINE HOW APPLICABLE LAWS APPLY TO SPECIFIC FACTS AND SITUATIONS. BLOG POSTS ARE BASED ON THE MOST CURRENT INFORMATION AT THE TIME THEY ARE WRITTEN. SINCE IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE LAWS OR OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES MAY HAVE CHANGED SINCE PUBLICATION, PLEASE CALL US TO DISCUSS ANY ACTION YOU MAY BE CONSIDERING AS A RESULT OF READING THIS BLOG.