Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
without a written opinion in this case which merely stated PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. By separate motion for rehearing, clarification, and
certification, Appellants are asking the District Court of Appeal, at the very
least, to provide a written opinion. Whether or not that motion is granted,
this motion should be because of the exceptional importance of the panel
decision. Even in its present PCA format the panel decision is of
exceptional importance.
3.
Internal Improvement Trust Fund and their so-called agent, the State of
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, whose conduct as agent is
very much under scrutiny. Protecting Floridians substantive and procedural
rights relating to the St. Johns River is not a trivial matter or one
undeserving of a stated basis of decision by the Florida appellate courts.
4.
two bases for discretionary review, even without certification by the District
Court of Appeal. By not providing a written opinion, the District Court of
Appeal is depriving the Florida Supreme Court of these bases for
discretionary review.
3
6.
8.
The Florida Supreme Court and all of the courts of this state
fiduciaries not mercenaries. Instead, they are keeping the profits flowing to
Georgia-Pacific by allowing public property to be used as private dumping
grounds. Georgia-Pacific dumps into the St. Johns River so that it can save
and make a lot of money. It assumes an entitlement to do this. [V, 666]
Appellants justifiably resent the fact that their trustees are not only
facilitating this entitlement but also are allowing their own administrative
processes and rules for substantive review to be circumvented in order to do
so, as detailed in Appellants briefs.
10.
intentional obstruction, trickery, and collusion, in approving GeorgiaPacifics publication of a highly misleading public notice in the newspaper
to cut off citizens administrative law rights to challenge the Trustees
approval of the pipeline. [IV, 600-616]
11.
the Florida Supreme Court would review these serious issues involving
Floridians substantive and procedural rights and their trustees corollary
substantive and procedural duties. Likely the Florida Supreme Court does
not want citizens to be wholly reliant upon extra-judicial means such as
internet petitions for federal criminal investigations or civil disobedience to
fight for justice involving their property and their participation rights meant
to ensure protection of their property.
12.
___________________________
Steven A. Medina
Attorney
Florida Bar No. 370622
P.O. Box 1021
Shalimar, Florida 32579
Phone: 850.621.7811
Fax: 850.362.0076
stevenamedina@yahoo.com
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANTS
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing
was served by electronic mail upon the following on this 10th day of June,
2015:
Jack Chisolm, Senior Assistant General Counsel
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
3900 Commonwealth Blvd, MS 35
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000
Email: Jack.Chisolm@dep.state.fl.us
Deitra.Henderson@dep.state.fl.us
DEP.Defense@dep.state.fl.us
Terry Cole, Esquire
Kellie Scott, Esquire
Gunster, Yoakley and Stewart
215 South Monroe Street, Suite 601
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Email: tcole@gunster.com
kscott@gunster.com
bfrazier@gunster.com
Warren K. Anderson, Jr.
The Public Trust Environmental Legal Institute of Florida, Inc.
2029 N. 3rd Street
Jacksonville Beach, Florida 32250
Email: taowalkerwarren@gmail.com
andrewdouglasmiller@gmail.com
__________________________
Steven A. Medina