SENEQUE v. FLORIDA PENINSULA INSURANCE COMPANY (2026)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Pierre SENEQUE, et al., Appellant, v. FLORIDA PENINSULA INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 3D24-2153

Decided: February 11, 2026

Before EMAS, FERNANDEZ and BOKOR, JJ.

Shield Law Group of Florida, LLC, and Jamie Alvarez, for appellant. Salehi, Boyer, Lavigne, Lombana, P.A., and Oscar Lombana, for appellee.

Affirmed. See Tillman v. State, 471 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1985) (“ In order to be preserved for further review by a higher court, an issue must be presented to the lower court and the specific legal argument or ground to be argued on appeal or review must be part of that presentation if it is to be considered preserved.”) and Peterson v. Lake Surprise II Condo. Assoc., 118 So. 3d 313 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (“ A conscious decision not to comply with the requirements of the law cannot be “excusable neglect” under the rule or any other equivalent requirement.”).

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Out of date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