Antonio Del Giudice v. NS Handyman Company

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: September 24, 2025
• Docket: 3D2024-1991
• Status: Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed September 24, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D24-1991 Lower Tribunal No. 24-45705-SP-05 ________________

Antonio Del Giudice, Appellant,

vs.

NS Handyman Company, Appellee.

An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Maria D. Ortiz, Judge.

Antonio Del Giudice, in proper person.

Eric J. Cvelbar, for appellee.

Before EMAS, GORDO and GOODEN, JJ.

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d

1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“Without a record of the trial proceedings, the

appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as

to conclude that the trial court's judgment is not supported by the evidence

or by an alternative theory. Without knowing the factual context, neither can

an appellate court reasonably conclude that the trial judge so misconceived

the law as to require reversal.”); see also § 77.041(3), Fla. Stat. (2024)

(“Upon the filing by a defendant of a sworn claim of exemption and request

for hearing, a hearing will be held as soon as practicable to determine the

validity of the claimed exemptions. If the plaintiff or the plaintiff’s attorney

does not file a sworn written statement that answers the defendant’s claim

of exemption within 8 business days after hand delivering the claim and

request . . . no hearing is required and the clerk must automatically dissolve

the writ and notify the parties of the dissolution by mail.”).