JERRY FERNANDEZ v. STANLEY I. FOODMAN, P.A., etc.
This text of JERRY FERNANDEZ v. STANLEY I. FOODMAN, P.A., etc. (JERRY FERNANDEZ v. STANLEY I. FOODMAN, P.A., 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.
Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed August 23, 2023. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D22-1689 Lower Tribunal No. 20-4274 CC ________________
Jerry Fernandez, Appellant,
vs.
Stanley I. Foodman, P.A., etc., Appellee.
An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Gordon Murray, Judge.
Jerry Fernandez, in proper person.
The Foodman Firm, P.A., and Daniel Foodman and Raymond S. Boyle, for appellee.
Before LOGUE, C.J., and SCALES and BOKOR, JJ.
PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Lloyd S. Meisels, P.A. v. Dobrofsky, 341 So. 3d 1131,
1136 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (“Because the defendants failed to file a response
with their supporting factual position, as required under the amended rule,
the trial court was permitted to consider the facts set forth in the plaintiff’s
motion for summary judgment as ‘undisputed for purposes of the motion.’”);
Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510(e)(2) (“If a party fails to properly support an assertion of
fact or fails to properly address another party’s assertion of fact as required
by rule 1.510(c), the court may . . . consider the fact undisputed for purposes
of the motion.”).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
JERRY FERNANDEZ v. STANLEY I. FOODMAN, P.A., etc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jerry-fernandez-v-stanley-i-foodman-pa-etc-fladistctapp-2023.