​

Biazzo Law, PLLC

 

​​​Florida State Courts | North Carolina State Courts | Eleventh Circuit | Fourth Circuit | U.S. Supreme Court​

​

Civil Appeals and Strategic Litigation for Matters With Serious Consequences

​

Biazzo Law represents appellants, appellees, trial counsel, businesses, organizations, property owners, and individuals in selected civil appeals and consequential civil litigation.

​

The firm handles civil appeals in Florida and North Carolina, federal appeals in the Eleventh and Fourth Circuits, selected proceedings involving the United States Supreme Court, and trial-court matters in which significant financial, property, constitutional, or institutional interests require disciplined legal analysis and advocacy.

​

Request a Matter Assessment
Appeals and Appellate Counsel | Strategic Civil Litigation

​

 

 

Time limits governing notices of appeal, rehearing motions, stays, injunctions, and discretionary review can be short and jurisdictional. If a ruling has recently been entered, identify the court, order date, and any known deadline when submitting the matter.

​

Focused Appellate Representation

 

An appeal is not a second trial. Appellate courts ordinarily decide whether the existing record establishes a preserved and harmful legal or procedural error under the applicable standard of review.

​

A responsible appellate assessment therefore begins with the record—not merely the client’s disagreement with the result.

 

Biazzo Law evaluates:

​

• Whether the judgment or order is appealable

• Whether the appellate deadline remains open

• Whether the relevant issues were preserved

• Which standard of review applies

• Whether the record supports the proposed arguments

• Whether an error was harmful to the result

• What relief an appellate court can provide

• Whether a stay or other emergency relief may be available

• Whether the likely benefit justifies the expected cost and risk

 

The firm does not recommend an appeal simply because a party is dissatisfied with a ruling. The objective is to identify the strongest viable issues, confront weaknesses early, and determine whether an appeal offers a legally and economically rational path forward.

​

Explore the Appellate Practice

​

Courts and Proceedings

 

Florida Civil Appeals

 

Representation in Florida’s District Courts of Appeal and selected matters before the Florida Supreme Court, including appeals arising from commercial, real-estate, property, constitutional, injunction, and other substantial civil disputes.

​

Florida Civil Appeals

​

North Carolina Civil Appeals

 

Representation in the North Carolina Court of Appeals and Supreme Court of North Carolina, including appeals from final judgments, interlocutory orders when review is available, contempt proceedings, injunctions, business disputes, property matters, and other civil cases.

​

North Carolina Civil Appeals 

​

Eleventh Circuit Appeals

 

Federal appellate representation in civil matters arising within the Eleventh Circuit, including appeals involving federal jurisdiction, constitutional issues, dispositive rulings, injunctions, commercial disputes, and government action.

​

Eleventh Circuit Appeals

​

Fourth Circuit Appeals

 

Federal appellate representation in civil matters arising within the Fourth Circuit, including record assessment, jurisdictional review, merits briefing, rehearing strategy, emergency relief, and potential Supreme Court review.

​

Fourth Circuit Appeals

​

U.S. Supreme Court and Amicus Practice

 

Selected work involving petitions for certiorari, opposition strategy, emergency proceedings, merits-stage issues, and amicus curiae briefs for organizations, interested stakeholders, counsel, and individuals seeking to present a distinct and useful perspective.

​

U.S. Supreme Court & Amicus Practice

​

Selected Civil Litigation With Appellate Consequences

 

Although appellate work is a principal focus of Biazzo Law, many important outcomes are determined before an appeal begins.

​

The firm accepts selected Florida and North Carolina civil matters in which substantial financial, property, constitutional, or business interests require careful factual development, sophisticated motion practice, emergency relief, or a trial-court strategy built with appellate review in mind.

​

Representative engagements may include:

​

• Business and material contract disputes

• Commercial real-estate, title, and ownership litigation

• Recovery of valuable assets and secured property

• Emergency injunctions and asset-preservation proceedings

• Constitutional claims and challenges to government action

• Dispositive motions and legally complex trial-court briefing

• Post-trial motions, preservation analysis, and preparation for appeal

 

Biazzo Law does not operate as a volume general-practice firm. Civil matters are evaluated based on the amount and interests at stake, the available documents and evidence, the legal and procedural posture, the potential remedies, the opposing parties’ ability to satisfy a judgment, and whether the anticipated result justifies the cost of litigation.

​

Representative Appellate Experience

 

Reported Florida Appellate Reversal

 

Corey J. Biazzo served as counsel for the appellant in Hallandale Plaza, LLC v. New Tropical Car Wash, LLC, a reported decision of Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal.

​

The appeal arose from a commercial landlord-tenant dispute involving additional rent, real-estate taxes, waiver, duress, statutory rent procedures, and due process. The appellate court reversed the dismissal and explained that a preliminary rent-determination proceeding was not a substitute for a final trial on the merits.

​

Read the Decision:  https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/fl-district-court-of-appeal/2165259.html 

​

Emergency Relief in the Supreme Court of North Carolina

 

In a North Carolina civil appeal involving a contempt order and disputed compliance obligations, Biazzo Law pursued emergency appellate relief after a stay was denied in the trial court and the North Carolina Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court of North Carolina subsequently granted a stay while appellate review proceeded.

​

U.S. Supreme Court Amicus Advocacy

 

Biazzo Law has participated as amicus curiae in five United States Supreme Court matters. In each, the Court's disposition aligned with the position advanced in the firm's briefing. Amicus practice differs from party representation: an amicus brief is submitted to assist the Court by addressing the broader legal, structural, or historical context of a case, rather than to advocate on behalf of a litigant. The Court did not necessarily cite the firm's briefs or adopt every argument advanced, and the firm's role in each matter was as amicus counsel rather than counsel for a party.

​

Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump / Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc., Nos. 24-1287 & 25-250 (on writs of certiorari to the D.C. and Federal Circuits). The question presented was whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act authorizes the President to impose tariffs absent clear congressional authorization. Biazzo Law's brief addressed the constitutional allocation of taxing authority under Article I and the statutory text of IEEPA and the National Emergencies Act. The Court held that IEEPA did not authorize the tariffs at issue.

​

Trump v. Illinois, No. 25A443 (application to stay an order of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois). The matter concerned the federalization and interstate deployment of National Guard units under 10 U.S.C. § 12406. Biazzo Law's brief addressed the statutory conditions for federalizing the Guard, the framework of Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, and the Posse Comitatus Act. The Supreme Court denied the government's stay application.

​

United States v. Hemani, No. 24-1234 (on writ of certiorari to the Fifth Circuit). The question presented was whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3) — which prohibits firearm possession by an unlawful user of a controlled substance — violates the Second Amendment as applied to a defendant with no allegation of violence, intoxicated possession, or firearm misuse. Applying the text-history-tradition framework of N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen and United States v. Rahimi, Biazzo Law's brief argued that historical firearm regulation targeted dangerous conduct rather than status. The Supreme Court held the prosecution inconsistent with the Second Amendment as applied.

​

Watson v. Republican National Committee, No. 24-1260 (on writ of certiorari to the Fifth Circuit). The question presented was whether federal statutes designating a uniform election day preempt a state law counting absentee ballots postmarked by election day but received within a short window afterward. Biazzo Law's brief, filed in support of the Mississippi Secretary of State, argued that the federal statutes govern when ballots must be cast, not when they must be received, and that the Elections Clause presumes state authority over election mechanics absent clear congressional preemption. The Supreme Court reversed the Fifth Circuit and adopted that distinction.

​

Trump v. Barbara, No. 25-365 (on writ of certiorari to the First Circuit). The case concerned the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause and Executive Order 14160, which conditioned citizenship at birth on parental immigration status. Corey J. Biazzo and Kevin Song filed a joint amicus brief at the certiorari stage addressing the original meaning of the Citizenship Clause under United States v. Wong Kim Ark; Kevin Song's contribution focused on that historical analysis.

 

Biazzo Law later filed a separate merits-stage brief addressing stare decisis and the separation-of-powers limits on executive reinterpretation of settled precedent. The Supreme Court held the Executive Order unconstitutional and reaffirmed the territorial rule of birthright citizenship recognized in Wong Kim Ark.

​

Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Biazzo Law's participation in the U.S. Supreme Court matters described above was through amicus curiae briefing and does not imply party representation.

​

Institutional and Asset-Recovery Experience

 

Attorney Corey J. Biazzo’s experience also includes serving as outside counsel in matters involving major banks and automotive financial entities.

​

Representative work has included complex title disputes, secured-property recovery, fraudulent transfers, contested possession, emergency relief, and litigation involving valuable corporate assets.

​

Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Every matter depends on its facts, record, procedural history, governing law, and available remedies.

​

When Biazzo Law May Be Engaged

 

After an Adverse Judgment or Appealable Order

 

The firm evaluates the record, jurisdiction, preservation, standards of review, harmful error, available remedies, and practical value of an appeal before proposing full representation.

​

To Defend a Favorable Judgment

 

Appellee representation requires more than responding to the appellant’s arguments. The judgment may be defensible on alternative grounds, and the appellee may need to address preservation defects, jurisdictional problems, the governing standard of review, cross-appeal questions, or efforts to stay enforcement.

​

When Emergency Relief Is Required

 

Stays, injunctions, expedited proceedings, and emergency applications require immediate attention to jurisdiction, procedural requirements, the existing record, likelihood of success, irreparable harm, and security or bond issues.

​

Before the Trial Court Record Closes

 

Trial counsel may engage Biazzo Law to assist with issue preservation, dispositive briefing, post-trial motions, injunctions, rehearing, finality questions, and other proceedings likely to affect appellate review.

​

For Selected Supreme Court or Amicus Matters

 

The firm considers engagements in which a petition, opposition, emergency application, or amicus brief can present a distinct legal argument, clarify the practical consequences of a ruling, address a recurring issue, or assist the Court beyond duplicating the parties’ submissions.

​​

Appellate Counsel for Trial Lawyers and Law Firms

 

Biazzo Law works with trial counsel who want focused appellate support without unnecessarily disrupting the originating firm’s relationship with the client.

​

The firm can serve as lead appellate counsel, co-counsel, consulting counsel, or a defined briefing resource. Depending on the matter, assistance may include:

​

• Assessing appellate jurisdiction and finality

• Identifying preservation problems

• Evaluating standards of review

• Reviewing the record objectively

• Assisting with dispositive or post-trial motions

• Preparing emergency stay or injunction papers

• Developing appellate issues and strategy

• Drafting or reviewing principal and reply briefs

• Preparing counsel for oral argument

• Evaluating rehearing or Supreme Court review

 

The respective roles of Biazzo Law and originating counsel are established at the beginning of the engagement. Communications can be coordinated through trial counsel, and the firm’s work can be limited to the specific appellate assignment.

​

Discuss an Appellate Matter as Trial Counsel

​

Matters That May Be a Strong Fit

 

Biazzo Law is most likely to consider matters involving one or more of the following:

​

• A substantial judgment, injunction, financial exposure, or property interest

• A consequential legal or constitutional question

• A potentially reversible error supported by the existing record

• A favorable judgment requiring a disciplined appellate defense

• A complex record or procedurally difficult appeal

• A need for emergency appellate relief

• A business, organizational, or institutional interest affected by the outcome

• Trial counsel seeking focused appellate assistance

• A Supreme Court or amicus issue to which counsel can add distinct value

 

The firm generally is not a fit for matters seeking free legal research, free case evaluation, contingency-only appellate representation, or an appeal based solely on dissatisfaction with the result.

​

Prospective clients should be prepared to provide the relevant orders, pleadings, transcripts, motions, exhibits, docket information, and known deadlines necessary for an objective review.

​

Fees and Engagement Structure

​

Fees are individually quoted after review of the court record, procedural posture, deadlines, legal issues, anticipated briefing, requested scope, and practical objectives. No two appellate records or assignments are identical.

​

When appropriate, Biazzo Law offers staged flat fees or defined fee milestones. A matter may be divided into stages such as:

​

1. Preliminary record and appellate assessment

2. Jurisdictional or emergency proceedings

3. Record preparation and merits briefing

4. Reply briefing

5. Moot-court preparation and oral argument

6. Rehearing or further appellate review

 

Court filing fees, transcripts, appeal bonds, printing, experts, local counsel, and other outside costs are separate unless expressly included in the written engagement agreement.

​

A preliminary assessment does not guarantee that the firm will recommend an appeal or accept full representation. The purpose of the assessment is to provide an objective evaluation before the client commits to a larger appellate engagement.

​

Is Your Matter a Fit?

​

How the Intake Process Works

 

1. Conflict Check

 

The prospective client provides the names of the parties, counsel, court, case number, order date, known deadlines, and a short description of the matter.

​

Do not send confidential substantive communications or sensitive documents until the firm confirms that the initial conflict check has been completed and provides document-submission instructions.

​

2. Preliminary Document Review

 

After initial conflict clearance, the firm identifies the materials needed to understand the procedural posture and determine whether a substantive assessment is appropriate.

​

3. Paid Appellate Assessment When Appropriate

 

For matters requiring significant review or legal analysis, the firm may propose a paid assessment. The scope and fee are established before substantive work begins.

​

4. Representation Decision

 

After the assessment, Biazzo Law may propose full representation, a limited appellate assignment, co-counsel participation, or another defined scope. The firm may also conclude that an appeal is not advisable or that the matter is not an appropriate fit.

​

Submitting information does not create an attorney-client relationship. Representation begins only after conflicts are cleared, the firm accepts the matter in writing, an engagement agreement is signed, and the required payment is received.

​

Senior-Lawyer Attention From Assessment Through Appeal

 

Biazzo Law was founded by Corey J. Biazzo, a Florida- and North Carolina-licensed attorney whose practice includes civil appeals, appellate-sensitive litigation, federal constitutional issues, emergency proceedings, and selected U.S. Supreme Court matters.

​

Before entering private practice, Corey served for four years on active duty in the United States Navy aboard the USS Harry S. Truman as a nuclear propulsion mechanic. That background informs an approach centered on preparation, precision, accountability, and calm decision-making when the stakes and pressure are high.

​

Clients and referring counsel work directly with the attorney responsible for evaluating the record, developing the strategy, and producing the written advocacy.

​

About Corey J. Biazzo

​

Appellate Analysis and Commentary

 

Biazzo Law publishes selected analysis concerning appellate procedure, civil appeals, emergency relief, constitutional litigation, and developments in the United States Supreme Court.

​

The firm’s commentary is intended to explain what a ruling means, why it matters, and what counsel or affected parties should consider next—not merely summarize the decision.

​

Attorney Corey J. Biazzo has also appeared on NewsNation to discuss birthright citizenship and Supreme Court litigation for a national audience.

​​

https://www.biazzolaw.com/post/attorney-corey-biazzo-appears-on-newsnation-to-discuss-birthright-citizenship-and-the-u-s-supreme-c  

​

Request an Appellate Assessment

 

If you are evaluating an appeal, defending a favorable judgment, confronting an emergency appellate deadline, or seeking appellate assistance for an existing client, provide the basic case information through the firm’s secure intake process.

​

Please identify:

​

• The court and case number

• The parties and counsel

• The order or judgment at issue

• The date the order was entered

• Any known deadline

• Whether you are the appellant, appellee, trial counsel, or another interested party

• The practical stakes and relief sought

• The anticipated legal budget

• The documents presently available for review

​

Florida and North Carolina civil appeals | Eleventh Circuit | Fourth Circuit | Selected U.S. Supreme Court and amicus matters

 

Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. The information on this website is general information and is not legal advice. Viewing the website or submitting an inquiry does not create an attorney-client relationship. Do not act or refrain from acting based on this website without obtaining advice concerning the specific facts, governing law, and deadlines applicable to your matter.

​