Janet L. Schmidt v. Stokes McMillan Antúnez Martinez-Lejarza P.A.

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 19, 2025
Docket3D2023-1996
StatusPublished

This text of Janet L. Schmidt v. Stokes McMillan Antúnez Martinez-Lejarza P.A. (Janet L. Schmidt v. Stokes McMillan Antúnez Martinez-Lejarza P.A.) 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
Janet L. Schmidt v. Stokes McMillan Antúnez Martinez-Lejarza P.A., (Fla. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed February 19, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D23-1996 Lower Tribunal No. 23-15113 ________________

Janet L. Schmidt, et al., Appellants,

vs.

Stokes McMillan Antúnez Martinez-Lejarza, P.A., Appellee.

An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Pedro P. Echarte, Jr., Judge.

Janet L. Schmidt (Dagsboro, DE), for appellants.

Stokes McMillan Antúnez Martinez-Lejarza, P.A., and Kimberly A. Martinez-Lejarza, for appellee.

Before LOGUE, C.J., and LOBREE and BOKOR, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Linden v. Auto Trend, Inc., 923 So. 2d 1281, 1281–82

(Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (“We affirm, finding that at the hearing on the motion to compel arbitration, appellant failed to demonstrate that an evidentiary

hearing was required to resolve the motion.”).

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

Related

Linden v. Auto Trend, Inc.
923 So. 2d 1281 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Janet L. Schmidt v. Stokes McMillan Antúnez Martinez-Lejarza P.A., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/janet-l-schmidt-v-stokes-mcmillan-antunez-martinez-lejarza-pa-fladistctapp-2025.