Grovin Farms, LLC v. Intercounty Engineering, Inc., Arch Insurance Company and the Gray Insurance Company

Opinion

FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 5D2025-2863

LT Case No. 2022-10384-CIDL

____________________________

GROVIN FARMS, LLC,

Appellant,

v.

INTERCOUNTY ENGINEERING, INC., ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY, and THE GRAY INSURANCE COMPANY,

Appellees.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County. Randell H. Rowe, III, Judge.

Grant Van Aman, of Van Aman Law, PLLC, Tampa, for Appellant.

Mike Piscitelli, Joseph W. Lawrence, II, and Christina Strandell, of VLP Copenhaver Espino, Fort Lauderdale, for Appellees Intercounty Engineering, Inc. and Arch Insurance Company.

No Appearance for Remaining Appellee.

September 4, 2026

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See Bolick v. Sperry, 82 So. 2d 374, 376 (Fla.

1955) (“Under our system of procedure the burden is always upon the appellant to make reversible error clearly appear.”); Ford Motor Co. v. Hetsler, No. 5D2024-2368, 15 Fla. L. Weekly D1582b, 2026 WL 2207050, at *8 (Fla. 5th DCA July 31, 2026) (“To carry its burden, an appellant must, at a minimum, adequately brief the important issues along the decisional path so the court is not left to do the lion’s share of the work. . . . If the gaps left by an initial brief would require the court to rebrief the appeal, the argument is insufficient, and we will affirm on that basis.” (citation modified)).

JAY, C.J., and EISNAUGLE and SOUD, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.

_____________________________