Maria Lima v. Christopher R. Gargano

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: December 4, 2024
• Docket: 3D2023-1915
• Status: Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed December 4, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D23-1915 Lower Tribunal No. 16-5582 ________________

Maria Lima, Appellant,

vs.

Christopher R. Gargano, et al., Appellees.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Carlos Manuel Guzman, Judge.

Maria Lima, in proper person.

Cooney Trybus Law, and Benjamin A. Kashi (Fort Lauderdale), for appellees.

Before, FERNANDEZ, SCALES and BOKOR JJ.

PER CURIAM. Maria Lima appeals a summary final judgment entered against her. We

review such order de novo. See Volusia County v. Aberdeen at Ormond

Beach, L.P., 760 So. 2d 126, 130 (Fla. 2000). As this court explained, and

as Lima noted in her motion for rehearing, Florida Rule of Civil Procedure

1.510(a) requires that “[t]he court shall state on the record the reasons for

granting or denying the motion.” The order on appeal contains only “[a] mere

pronouncement the court has granted” such motion, which “fails to comply

with the rule as it does not contain reasons for granting or denying the

motion.” Jones v. Ervolino, 339 So. 3d 473, 475 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022).

While we take no position on the merits of the motion for summary

judgment, “[t]he wording of the new rule makes clear that the court’s

obligation” to state the reasons for granting (or denying) a summary

judgment motion “is mandatory.” In re Amends. to Fla. Rule of Civ. Proc.

1.510, 317 So. 3d 72, 77 (Fla. 2021). We therefore vacate the summary final

judgment and reverse and remand for entry of an order that complies with

the rule.

Reversed and remanded.