CARLOS EDUARDO GONCALVES v. SOUTH TOWER AT THE POINT CONDOMINIUM, INC., etc.

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedOctober 12, 2022
Docket21-1966
StatusPublished

This text of CARLOS EDUARDO GONCALVES v. SOUTH TOWER AT THE POINT CONDOMINIUM, INC., etc. (CARLOS EDUARDO GONCALVES v. SOUTH TOWER AT THE POINT CONDOMINIUM, INC., etc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
CARLOS EDUARDO GONCALVES v. SOUTH TOWER AT THE POINT CONDOMINIUM, INC., etc., (Fla. Ct. App. 2022).

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed October 12, 2022. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D21-1966 Lower Tribunal No. 19-1185 ________________

Carlos Eduardo Goncalves, et al., Appellants,

vs.

South Tower at the Point Condominium, Inc., etc., Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Charles Johnson, Judge.

Claudio R. Cedrez, LLC, and Claudio R. Cedrez Pellegrino, for appellants.

Becker & Poliakoff, P.A., and Lilliana M. Farinas-Sabogal, for appellee.

Before EMAS, SCALES and MILLER, JJ.

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See RM & Assocs. Consulting, Inc. v. People’s Tr. Ins. Co.

336 So. 3d 762 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) (citing Estate of Herrera v. Berlo Indus.,

Inc., 840 So. 2d 272, 273 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003) (“[Appellant] seeks to raise

issues which were not raised in the trial court. However, issues not presented

in the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. Thus, [appellant]

is precluded from raising new arguments on appeal.”)) Azanza v. Priv.

Funding Grp., Inc., 24 So. 3d 586, 587 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (“This court has

held that any error in failing to give twenty days’ notice prior to a summary

judgment hearing is waived if the party does not object to insufficient notice

either before a summary judgment hearing, at the summary judgment

hearing, or in a motion for rehearing”) (citing E & I, Inc. v. Excavators, Inc.,

697 So. 2d 545, 546 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (holding that “where, as in the

present case, there was no objection to the insufficient notice prior to the

[summary judgment] hearing, at the [summary judgment] hearing, nor in the

motion for rehearing, the issue has been waived”)). See also § 718.121(6),

Fla. Stat. (2019) (requiring association to deliver to unit owner a notice of

intent to record lien and further providing that such notice must be in

“substantially” the form set forth within the statute).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Azanza v. Private Funding Group, Inc.
24 So. 3d 586 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2009)
Estate of Herrera v. Berlo Industries Inc.
840 So. 2d 272 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)
E & I, INC. v. Excavators, Inc.
697 So. 2d 545 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
CARLOS EDUARDO GONCALVES v. SOUTH TOWER AT THE POINT CONDOMINIUM, INC., etc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carlos-eduardo-goncalves-v-south-tower-at-the-point-condominium-inc-fladistctapp-2022.