Whether Florida's appellate procedure of issuing per curiam decisions without opinion on summary judgment appeals violates due process and equal protection rights

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether Florida’s rules of appellate procedure which provide for the issuance by the Court of Appeals of a per curiam decision, without an opinion, affirming a trial court’s grant of summary judgment for which there is an appeal by right, and for which Florida’s published appellate decisions guarantee de novo review, and where because the per curiam decision fails to provide an explanation for the decision, the Florida Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction to exercise discretionary review of the Court of Appeals’ decision, violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. 2. Whether the requirement that a litigant appealing a Florida trial court’s decision granting a motion for summary judgment pay an appeal fee constitutes an unconstitutional taking under the Fourteenth Amendment, where the appeal is an appeal by right, where Florida’s published appellate decisions guarantee de novo review of trial court decisions granting summary judgment, but where the Florida Court of Appeals issues a summary per curiam decision affirming the grant of summary judgment without an opinion explaining the basis for the affirmance, and without any citation of case law supporting the affirmance. 3. Whether Florida’s rules of appellate procedure which provide for the issuance by the Court of Appeals of per curiam decisions, without an opinion, affirming a trial court’s grant of summary judgment for which there is an appeal by right, and for which Florida’s published appellate decisions guarantee de novo review, while in other such appeals involving a grant of summary judgment the Court of Appeals issues decisions with an opinion explaining the basis of the decision, ii and where there is no rational relationship related to a legitimate state interest which justifies the disparity between appeals which are decided by a per curiam decision without an opinion, and appeals which are decided by decisions which include an opinion explaining the basis for the decision, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. 4. Whether the trial court’s allowance of Respondent’s attorney to orally file a new motion for summary judgment in the course of the hearing to apply to an amended complaint, without prior written notice being provided to Petitioner before the hearing, contrary to Florida’s rules of civil procedure, and contrary to published Florida precedent, and proceeded to grant the motion, violated Petitioner’s right to due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. iii LIST OF PROCEEDINGS Supreme Court of Florida No. SC2024-0849 Alison Gershenson, Petitioner(s), v. Elizabet Da Silva, Respondent(s). Order denying Appellant’s Notice to Invoke Discretionary Jurisdiction: June 7, 2024 Florida Fourth District Court of Appeals No. 4D2023-2131 Alison Gershenson, Appellant, v. Elizabet Da Silva, Appellee. Per Curiam Order Affirming Order Granting Motion For Summary Judgment: April 11, 2024 Order denying Appellant’s April 24, 2024 motion for rehearing, clarification, and written opinion: May 10, 2024 County Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County, Florida Case No. COCE23032118 Division 56 Elizabet Da Silva, v. Alison Gershenson, Defendant(s)/ Respondent(s). Order Granting Motion For Summary Judgement With Directives To August 1, 2023 Final Judgment: August 4, 2023