KEVIN TATE
v.
DENNIS MATTHEWS D/B/A/ MATTHEWS REALTY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Kevin Tate appealed a trial court decision in a landlord-tenant matter against Dennis Matthews d/b/a Matthews Realty. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's decision, finding that Tate failed to carry his burden of demonstrating error on appeal.
The court affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that Tate failed to carry his appellate burden of demonstrating error because his initial brief lacked proper record citations, did not explain evidence presented or excluded, and did not advise the court of arguments made at trial.
[1] The decision of the trial court is presumed to be correct on appeal.
[2] The appellant bears the burden to demonstrate error on appeal.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The decision of the trial court is presumed to be correct.”
Establishes the foundational standard that appellate courts apply when reviewing lower court decisions
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThis case involves a landlord-tenant dispute between Kevin Tate (appellant) and Dennis Matthews d/b/a Matthews Realty. The trial court rendered a deci…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Appellant'S Burden To Demonstrate Error cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED.
MAKAR and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur. EDWARDS, C.J., concurring with opinion.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________
Case No. 5D2024-1003 LT Case No. 2023-SC-26887
EDWARDS, C.J., concurring opinion.
“The decision of the trial court is presumed to be correct.” Figueroa v. Kossiver, 336 So. 3d 1260, 1262 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022) (citing Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979)). In every appeal, the appellant has “the burden . . . to demonstrate error.” Filomia v. Celebrity Cruises Inc., 271 So. 3d 1199 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (quoting Applegate, 377 So. 2d at 1152). The fact that Appellant is not represented by counsel here is of no consequence because this burden remains “squarely upon the litigant, whether represented by counsel or not.” Steele v. Fla. Unemp. Appeals Comm'n, 596 So. 2d 1190, 1192 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). In my opinion, Appellant has failed to carry his burden in his initial brief as he does not: cite to the record on appeal, explain what evidence was presented or excluded during trial, or advise us as to what arguments he made to the trial court opposing or requesting any evidence, ruling, or the ultimate outcome of the trial. Arguments not raised in the initial brief are waived. Figueroa, 336 So. 3d at 1263. No transcript of the trial was filed with this Court. Furthermore, because they are to remain impartial, courts of appeal are neither required nor permitted to rebrief an appeal for any of the parties. Id. at 1264.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Steele v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 596 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
- Lussy v. Dep't of Legal Affairs, 356 So. 3d 784 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024)