Does the 1923 Florida Supreme Court embezzlement Case of Kirkland v State excuse Jackson County's acquiescence to County Commissioner Peacock to create a custom or practice to deny Due Process for the Plaintiffs right to be heard?

Question Presented From the 11‘ Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion in Case No. 23-11732, affirming the District Court’s Order, denying a rehearing, the Petitioner presents the following question for review and consideration: Does the 1923 Florida Supreme Court : embezzlement Case of Kirkland v State, 86 ; Fla. 64, 97, So. 502 (1923) excuse Jackson County’s acquiescence to County . Commissioner Peacock to create a custom : or practice to deny Due Process for the Plaintiffs right to be heard? This question is central to the District Court’s judgment and Appeals Court’s affirmation, excusing Respondent Jackson County Board of County Commissioners from the actions of County Commissioner Respondent James D. Peacock. Florida Court Cases that apply Kirkland v. State deal with misuse of an official office for personal gain. In the 1966 Case of Padgett v. Bay County, the 1st District Court of Appeals of Florida recognized that context matters and held that: “The cited case of Kirkland v. State, 86 Fla. 64, : 97, So. 502 (1923) has no application to the case at bar.” “In the case before us, the Commissioner in whose district the questioned work was done, did not derive any monetary or other compensation thereof.” The District and Appeals Courts’ holding otherwise, as in their recorded opinion, is ripe for abuse. ii (b-1) Certificate of Interested Persons ; The persons and entities known to Petitioner Robert M. Rogers, as interested in the outcome of this matter, are as follows: : 1. Florida Association of Counties Trust, insurer for Respondents Jackson County and James Peacock, : 2. Frank, Michael J., United States District Magistrate Judge, ' 8. Jackson County, Respondents, 4. Krebs, Eric A., Counsel for Respondent Jackson County, 5. Peacock, James D., Respondent, 6. Rogers, Robert M. Petitioner & property owner, 7. Taylor, Jason C., Counsel for Respondent James D. Peacock, 8. The Krizner Group, Counsel for Respondent dames D. Peacock, 9. Warner Law Firm, P.A., Counsel for Respondent Jackson ‘County, 10.Warner, William G., Counsel for Respondent ; Jackson County, 11. Willoughby, Colby B., Respondent, 12. Yarbrough, Alyssa M., Counsel for Respondent Jackson County. : 138. Baxter, Jim Bob, local farmer and 5-year leaseholder since 2014. tl 7 (b-2)