JORGE MARTIN HERNANDEZ, ETC.
v.
CAPITAL ONE, N.A.
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 trial court's order is affirmed because the appellant's initial brief fails to demonstrate a preliminary basis for reversal.
[1] A summary affirmance under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.315(a) is appropriate when an appellant's initial brief fails to demonstrate a preliminary basis for reve…
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 intelligenceJorge Martin Hernandez appealed an order from Miami-Dade County Court in a case against Capital One, N.A. The specific underlying facts are not detail…
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 Summary Affirmance cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed August 12, 2026.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
No. 3D26-0208 Lower Tribunal No. 24-249278-SP-25
Jorge Martin Hernandez, Appellant,
vs.
Capital One, N.A., Appellee.
An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Linda Singer Stein, Judge.
Jorge Martin Hernandez, in proper person.
Pollack & Rosen, P.A., and Kevin John Spinozza, for appellee.
Before FERNANDEZ, GORDO, and GOODEN, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Upon careful review of the record and appellant's initial brief, we summarily affirm the order. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.315(a). We conclude that the appellant's initial brief fails to demonstrate a preliminary basis for reversal.
Affirmed.