HEIDI PADILLA INC v. BANKERS TITLE ESCROW SERVICES INC (2026)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

HEIDI PADILLA, INC., Appellant, v. BANKERS TITLE & ESCROW SERVICES, INC., et al., Appellees.

No. 3D25-0868

Decided: July 30, 2026

Before FERNANDEZ, MILLER, and LOBREE, JJ.

Burlington & Rockenbach, P.A., and Bard D. Rockenbach (West Palm Beach); Richard J. Diaz P.A., and Richard J. Diaz, for appellant. Cruser, Mitchell, Novitz, Sanchez, Gaston, & Zimet, LLP, and Kenneth R. Drake, and Audrey Fernandez, for appellee Bankers Title & Escrow Services Inc.

Affirmed. See Ashear v. Sklarey, 247 So. 3d 574, 578 n.3 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (“This issue was not raised in the initial brief and may not be considered on appeal.”); Fla. Fish & Wildlife Conser. Comm'n’n v. Daws, 256 So. 3d 907, 930 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018) (“An assigned error will be deemed to have been abandoned when it is completely omitted from the briefs.” (quoting City of Miami v. Steckloff, 111 So. 2d 446, 447 (Fla. 1959) (Makar, J, dissenting)); Polyglycoat Corp. v. Hirsch Distribs., Inc., 442 So. 2d 958, 960 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983) (“When points, positions, facts and supporting authorities are omitted from the brief, a court is entitled to believe that such are waived, abandoned, or deemed by counsel to be unworthy.”).

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Out of date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