FERNANDEZ v. FOODMAN (2023)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jerry FERNANDEZ, Appellant, v. Stanley I. FOODMAN, P.A., etc., Appellee.

No. 3D22-1689

Decided: August 23, 2023

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

Jerry Fernandez, in proper person. The Foodman Firm, P.A., and Daniel Foodman and Raymond S. Boyle, for appellee.

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.”).

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network