CITY OF MIAMI
v.
MIGUEL ANGEL GABELA
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 Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a final judgment from the trial court, indicating that a written opinion explaining the reasoning would follow. The specific details of the case and the court's rationale are not yet available in this opinion.
The appellate court held that the final judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. A more detailed explanation of the court's reasoning is pending.
“The final judgment of the trial court is affirmed, with a written opinion to follow.”
This quote establishes the court's decision to affirm the lower court's judgment and indicates that further explanation will be provided later.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThis case involves an appeal filed by the City of Miami and others against Miguel Angel Gabela and others. The appeal concerns a final judgment entere…
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 Absurdity Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed November 7, 2023. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-1776 Lower Tribunal No. 23-20926
________________
City of Miami, et al.,
Appellants,
vs.
Miguel Angel Gabela, et al.,
Appellees.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Pedro P. Echarte, Jr., Judge. Victoria Méndez, City Attorney and Kerri L. McNulty, Litigation & Appeals Division Chief, and Eric J. Eves, Assistant City Attorney, for appellants. Law Firm of Juan-Carlos Planas, P.A., and Juan-Carlos Planas, for appellee Miguel Angel Gabela. Before LINDSEY, HENDON and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM.
The final judgment of the trial court is affirmed, with a written opinion
to follow.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pacheco v. Waldo Acebo, M.D., P.A. (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)
-
De La Portilla v. Gabela (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)
Authorities Cited (13 total)
- Borden v. East-European Ins. Co., 921 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 2006)
- Daniels v. Fla. Dep't OF Health, 898 So. 2d 61 (Fla. 2005)
- Hechtman v. Nations Title Ins. OF NEW York, 840 So. 2d 993 (Fla. 2003)
- Rinker Materials Corp. v. City OF N. Miami, 286 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 1973)
- Bedroc Ltd., LLC v. United States, 541 U.S. 176 (U.S. 2004)
- The Reform Party OF Fla. v. Black, 885 So. 2d 303 (Fla. 2004)
- Solveig Edna Hill v. Davis, 70 So. 3d 572 (Fla. 2011)
- Gaulden v. State, 195 So. 3d 1123 (Fla. 2016)
- Burns v. Lucie Tondreau, 139 So. 3d 481 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)
- Spence-Jones v. Dunn, 118 So. 3d 261 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)