RAMALLAH, INC.
v.
BRICKELL GROUP CONSTRUCTION LLC
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.
The court affirmed the trial court's ruling on the motion to strike because the appellant failed to preserve its legal arguments for appellate review by presenting the specific legal grounds to the lower court.
[1] In order to be preserved for appellate review, an issue must be presented to the lower court, and the specific legal argument or ground to be argued on appeal must be par…
[2] A trial court's ruling on a motion to strike a pleading is reviewed by an appellate court for abuse of discretion.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“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.”
Citing Tillman v. State, establishing the preservation requirement for appellate review
Ramallah, Inc. appealed a circuit court decision concerning a motion to strike filed in a construction-related dispute with Brickell Group Constructio…
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 Preservation Of Issues For Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed April 1, 2026. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D25-0217 Lower Tribunal No. 23-24418-CA-01 Ramallah, Inc., Appellant, vs. Brickell Group Construction, LLC, Appellee. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Beatrice Butchko Sanchez, Judge. David B. Pakula, P.A., and David B. Pakula (Pembroke Pines); The Law Offices of Eddy O. Marban, and Eddy O. Marban, for appellant. South Florida Appeals, P.A., and Wm. Allen Bonner, for appellee. Before GORDO, BOKOR and GOODEN, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Tillman v. State, 471 So. 2d 32, 35 (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.”); Belson v. Miller, 314 So. 3d 525, 527 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (“We review a lower court's ruling on a motion to strike pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.150 for abuse of discretion.”); F.V. Constr. Corp. v. Cmty. Bank of Fla., Inc., 106 So. 3d 1012, 1013 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) ("A hearing on a motion to strike a pleading as a sham is not a hearing to resolve the merits of the issues, but to determine if there are any genuine issues to be determined."); Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.130(b) (“Statements in a pleading may be adopted by reference in a different part of the same pleading, in another pleading, or in any motion."). 2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dora v. Morrison (Fla. 5th DCA 2024)…priety of the motions to strike pursuant to the rules of civil procedure as though these were adversary probate proceedings. B. Motions to Strike A lower court’s ruling on a motion to strike is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Belson v. Miller, 314 So. 3d 525, 527 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (citing Upland Dev. of Cent. Fla., Inc. v. Bridge, 910 So. 2d 942, 944 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)). “Because striking a pleading is an extreme measure, it is disfavored in the law.” Bridge, 910 So. 2d at 944 (citing Yunger v. Olive…
-
Dora v. Morrison (Fla. 5th DCA 2024)…priety of the motions to strike pursuant to the rules of civil procedure as though these were adversary probate proceedings. B. Motions to Strike A lower court’s ruling on a motion to strike is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Belson v. Miller, 314 So. 3d 525, 527 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (citing Upland Dev. of Cent. Fla., Inc. v. Bridge, 910 So. 2d 942, 944 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)). “Because striking a pleading is an extreme measure, it is disfavored in the law.” Bridge, 910 So. 2d at 944 (citing Yunger v. Olive…
Authorities Cited
- THE Florida BAR v. Schell, 422 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 1982)
- F.V. Constr. Corp. & Frances Valera v. Cmty. Bank OF Fla., Inc., 106 So. 3d 1012 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)
- Magela Belson v. Miller, 314 So. 3d 525 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)