RODRIGUEZ
v.
STANFIELD

Fla. 3d DCA | 2019-04-17
No. 19-0117
Emas, C.J., Logue, J., Hendon, J., Gonzalez-Paulson, J.
273 So. 3d 1067 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2019)

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

The court affirmed the trial court's order because the appellant's initial brief failed to demonstrate any preliminary basis for reversal.


Headnotes

[1] Under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.315(a), an appellate court may summarily affirm an order when the appellant's initial brief fails to demonstrate a preliminary…

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

Facts & Procedural History

Milagros Rodriguez appealed a decision from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County. The specific underlying facts are not detailed in this summary af…

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.


Opinion of the Court
Emas

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed April 17, 2019. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D19-117 Lower Tribunal No. 19-262 ________________ Milagros Rodriguez, Appellant, vs. Griselda Stanfield, Appellee. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Michaelle Gonzalez-Paulson, Judge. Milagros Rodriguez, in proper person. Walter J. Harvey, School Board Attorney, and Jeff James, Assistant School Board Attorney, for appellee. Before EMAS, C.J., and LOGUE and HENDON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Upon our review of the record and the initial brief, we affirm on the authority of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.315(a) (providing: “After service of the initial brief . . . , the court may summarily affirm the order to be reviewed if the court finds that no preliminary basis for reversal has been demonstrated.”) 2


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw