Oakley v. Oakley, 2011-CA-001410-ME
Published: Striking Appellant’s Brief and Dismissing Appeal
Dad’s counsel filed Notice of Appeal from FC’s verbal order at hearing denying his motion to remove supervised parenting time restriction, inter alia. FC entered its written order one week after the hearing, and only one day after Dad filed his Notice of Appeal. CA recognized that courts speak only through written orders and that Dad should have appealed from the written order or amended his original notice to include the written order. Because he did neither, there was no order for CA to review, and appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
CA also pointed out that Dad’s brief was not in compliance with CR 76.12 due to omission of pinpoint citations to written or video record and to omission of statements of error preservation, even after Dad was given an opportunity to submit a second brief; so brief was stricken.