Felipe Sixto v. Citizens Property Insurance Corporation

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJanuary 21, 2026
Docket3D2024-0998
StatusPublished

This text of Felipe Sixto v. Citizens Property Insurance Corporation (Felipe Sixto v. Citizens Property Insurance Corporation) 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
Felipe Sixto v. Citizens Property Insurance Corporation, (Fla. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed January 21, 2026. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D24-998 Lower Tribunal No. 21-26989-CA-01 ________________

Felipe Sixto, Appellant,

vs.

Citizens Property Insurance Corporation, Appellee.

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

Giasi Law, P.A., and Melissa A. Giasi (Tampa), for appellant.

Dinsmore & Shohl, LLP and Kathryn L. Ender and Janice Lopez, for appellee.

Before EMAS, GORDO and BOKOR, JJ.

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Campbell v. Salman, 384 So. 2d 1331, 1333 (Fla. 3d

DCA 1980) (reversing summary final judgment, holding: “Since the affidavit

was based on information and belief rather than personal knowledge, it was

not admissible into evidence and should not have been considered by the

trial court.”); Thompson v. Citizens Nat. Bank of Leesburg, Fla., 433 So. 2d

32, 32 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983) (“An affidavit based on information and belief

rather than personal knowledge is not admissible into evidence and should

not be considered by the trial court on a motion for summary judgment.”);

Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510(4) (“Affidavits or Declarations. An affidavit or

declaration used to support or oppose a motion must be made on personal

knowledge, set out facts that would be admissible in evidence, and show that

the affiant or declarant is competent to testify on the matters stated.”); Castle

Key Ins. Co. v. Raymond H. Duke Enters., Inc., 135 So. 3d 578, 580 n.1 (Fla.

1st DCA 2014) (observing that “a trial court may not consider inadmissible

evidence in determining the disposition of a summary judgment motion.”);

see also Custom Design Expo, Inc. v. Synergy Rents, Inc., 327 So. 3d 427

(Fla. 2d DCA 2021) (“hearsay cannot form the basis in an affidavit for

establishing a genuine issue of material fact that would preclude summary

judgment.”).

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

Related

Campbell v. Salman
384 So. 2d 1331 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
Thompson v. CITIZENS NAT. BK.
433 So. 2d 32 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)
Castle Key Insurance Co. v. Raymond H. Duke Enterprises, Inc.
135 So. 3d 578 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Felipe Sixto v. Citizens Property Insurance Corporation, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/felipe-sixto-v-citizens-property-insurance-corporation-fladistctapp-2026.