NINOSKA D. BRACHO MARTINEZ
v.
JONATHAN M. MOREY

Fla. 3d DCA | 2025-12-10
No. 2024-1250
Rosinek, Senior Judge, Emas, J., Miller, J., Lobree, J.
2025 FL 11684 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2025)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Holding

An undisposed-of motion to determine rent precludes entry of final judgment in a nonpayment eviction action.

Headnotes

[1] A trial court may not enter final judgment in a nonpayment eviction action when the tenant has timely filed a motion to determine rent that remains undisposed of in the t…

Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence
Key Quotes

“an 'undisposed-of motion to determine rent preclude[s] entry of final judgment based on nonpayment.'”

Court citing Axen v. Poah Cutler Manor, LLC, 323 So. 3d 800, 801 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021)
Facts & Procedural History

Landlord Jonathan M. Morey filed an eviction complaint against Bracho for nonpayment of rent. Bracho timely answered and filed a motion to determine r…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Topics
Landlord-Tenant Law

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Landlord-Tenant Law cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed December 10, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D24-1250 Lower Tribunal No. 24-56927-CC-05 ________________

Ninoska D. Bracho Martinez, Appellant,

vs.

Jonathan M. Morey, Appellee.

An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Jeffrey Rosinek, Senior Judge.

Legal Services of Greater Miami, Inc., and James R. Glover and Jeffrey Hearne, for appellant.

No appearance, for appellee.

Before EMAS, MILLER and LOBREE, JJ.

LOBREE, J.

Ninoska D. Bracho Martinez (“Bracho”) appeals a final judgment of

1 We acknowledge the record contains no transcript of this hearing. Yet it is clear, even without the benefit of a transcript, that the trial court entered final judgment without consideration of the motion to determine rent as its order merely grants final judgment.

2 Although Bracho has relocated after her eviction, we exercise our discretion to dispose of this appeal on the merits, because “the eviction can have collateral consequences for the Tenants when they seek to obtain housing or credit.” Ford v. Princeton Groves FL Apartments, 410 So. 3d 1272, 1277 n.2 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025) (quoting Alfonso v. Maiuri, 405 So. 3d 527, 530 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)).3 Based on this disposition, we decline to reach the remaining argument.

Footnotes
2 eviction from her residence. Based on the record before us, we reverse because the trial court prematurely entered final judgment without addressing Bracho’s motion to determine rent. The landlord, Jonathan M. Morey, filed an eviction complaint against Bracho and her husband for failing to pay rent. Five days later, Bracho, then self-represented, answered the complaint and filed a motion to determine rent contending that she overpaid the rent. Less than a month later, Bracho filed a letter with evidence she asserted supported her defense of payment. Morey moved for default on the basis that Bracho had not paid the requested rent into the court registry under section 83.60(2), Florida Statutes (2024). This motion erroneously stated that no motion to determine rent had been filed. The trial court issued a notice of special set Zoom/virtual hearing scheduled for “Defendant’s Letter.” At that hearing, the trial court entered final judgment of eviction.1 Bracho obtained counsel and moved for rehearing and to vacate the final judgment. The trial court denied the motion. On appeal, Bracho contends the trial court erred by entering final judgment without ruling on her motion to determine rent, and that she was
3 denied due process as the trial court entered the eviction final judgment at a hearing noticed only for “Defendant’s Letter.”2 The record shows Bracho timely filed her motion to determine rent and no order disposing of her motion was entered. Under Florida law, an “undisposed-of motion to determine rent preclude[s] entry of final judgment based on nonpayment.” Axen v. Poah Cutler Manor, LLC, 323 So. 3d 800, 801 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021); see also Prince v. MCR Apts. 1, LLC, 326 So. 3d 228, 228 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) (“[W]e conclude the tenant’s motion for determination of rent, pending and unresolved in the trial court, precluded entry of the judgment.”); Ramirez v. Lopez, 357 So. 3d 1281, 1281 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (reversing “the final judgment of eviction in this landlord-tenant dispute because the trial court should have set Tenant’s motion to determine rent for an evidentiary hearing to resolve the disputed issue of how much rent Tenant should have deposited into the court registry”). Therefore, the trial court erred in granting the final judgment and we vacate the final judgment for eviction.3
4 Reversed and remanded.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw