BRODERICK v. INGLETON (2026)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Carol Jean BRODERICK, Appellant, v. Paul C. INGLETON, et al., Appellees.

No. 3D25-0083

Decided: July 09, 2026

Before LOGUE, LINDSEY and BOKOR, JJ.

Law Office of Scott Glassman, P.A., and Ronald L. Bornstein (West Palm Beach), for appellant. Khan Law, P.A., and Faequa A. Khan, for appellees.

Affirmed. See Sakowitz v. Waterside Townhomes Cmty. Ass'n, Inc., 338 So. 3d 26, 28 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (“Findings of fact derived from the evidentiary hearing ․ may not be disturbed on appeal unless shown to be unsupported by competent and substantial evidence or to constitute an abuse of discretion.” (internal quotation omitted)); Parra de Rey v. Rey, 114 So. 3d 371, 386–87 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (“It goes without saying that conclusory allegations of fraud are insufficient ․ [T]he Wife explained that ․ she was entering into the agreement freely and voluntarily when she executed the agreement.”); Casto v. Casto, 508 So. 2d 330, 334 (Fla. 1987) (“If an agreement that is unreasonable is freely entered into, it is enforceable.”).

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Out of date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