LETTICIA LOPEZ
v.
PEDRO FERNANDEZ
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.
A trial court's order granting a permanent injunction for protection of a minor child is affirmed when the appellant fails to provide transcripts or a statement of evidence and no legal error is apparent on the face of the order.
[1] When an appellant fails to provide transcripts or a statement of evidence in an appellate proceeding, the trial court's judgment carries a presumption of correctness and…
Previewing 1 of 1 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 appellate proceedings the decision of a trial court has the presumption of correctness and the burden is on the appellant to demonstrate error. . . . Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court's judgment is not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory.”
Court explaining the burden on appellant and limitations of review without adequate record
Letticia Lopez, the mother of a minor child, appealed from a final order granting a permanent injunction sought by Pedro Fernandez, the father, for pr…
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 Presumption Of Correctness Of Trial Court Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed July 23, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D25-486 Lower Tribunal No. 19-13547-FC-04 ________________
Letticia Lopez, Appellant,
vs.
Pedro Fernandez, Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Stacy D. Glick, Judge.
Letticia Lopez, in proper person.
Craig E. Weissberg, P.A., and Craig E. Weissberg, for appellee.
Before FERNANDEZ, GORDO and LOBREE, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Letticia Lopez, the mother, appeals from a final order granting a
2 permanent injunction sought by the father Pedro Fernandez, for protection of their minor child. We have jurisdiction. See Art. V, § 4(b)(1), Fla. Const.; Fla. R. App. P. 9.130(a)(3)(B). We affirm. No transcripts were provided nor was any statement of the evidence or proceedings prepared pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(b)(4), (5). Without an adequate record, we are limited to a review of the order entered by the lower court. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“In appellate proceedings the decision of a trial court has the presumption of correctness and the burden is on the appellant to demonstrate error. . . . Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court’s judgment is not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory. Without knowing the factual context, neither can an appellate court reasonably conclude that the trial judge so misconceived the law as to require reversal.”). The trial court’s findings were predicated upon the best interests of the child. Finding no legal error apparent on the face of the order, we affirm. See Saenz v. Diaz, 50 Fla. L. Weekly D1379, D1380 (Fla. 3d DCA June 25, 2025); Sheikh v. Mughal-Sheikh, 114 So. 3d 212, 213 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012). Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Somma v. Metra Elecs. Corp., 727 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Jimil M. Sheikh v. Zulle-Huma Mughal-Sheikh, 114 So. 3d 212 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)