Court Filings

The Sixth District Court of Appeal granted the Department of Revenue’s motion to dismiss an appeal by Adrelynn Shattell Thomas for lack of jurisdiction. Thomas, the obligee parent, attempted to directly appeal a final administrative paternity and support order entered February 10, 2026. The court followed White v. Department of Revenue and concluded Florida law (section 409.2563 read with chapter 120) authorizes direct appellate review only to the obligor parent and the Department in these administrative support proceedings, not to an obligee parent. Because Thomas lacked statutory standing to invoke direct review, the appeal was dismissed.

The appellate court reviewed Charles F. Cheleden's appeal from final agency actions by the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Community Association Management. After considering the record and briefs, the court unanimously affirmed the agency's decisions. The opinion is short and does not elaborate on legal reasoning in the published entry; it simply states the judgment affirming the agency. The decision is not final until any timely motion for rehearing is resolved.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Orama’s Delivery Transport Corp from an order of the Commercial Motor Vehicle Review Board involving the Florida Department of Transportation. The appellate court issued a brief per curiam decision on April 27, 2026, affirming the board's order. No extended opinion or reasoning appears in the published entry; the court simply affirmed the lower body's decision and noted concurrence by three judges. The decision is not final until any timely motions under Florida appellate rules are resolved.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an administrative appeal by Hanna Oaks Operating LLC from a decision of the Agency for Health Care Administration. The court issued a short per curiam opinion affirming the agency's decision. No opinion text explaining the reasoning was published in this disposition; the court simply affirmed the agency's action and noted concurrence by three judges. The decision was entered April 27, 2026, and is subject to any timely authorized motion under Florida appellate rules.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an administrative appeal by 5539 NPR Operating LLC (doing business as New Port Richey Center for Assisted Living & Memory Care) from a decision of the Agency for Health Care Administration. The court issued a short per curiam opinion on April 27, 2026, and affirmed the agency's decision. No written opinion explaining the court's reasoning appears in the file beyond the single-word disposition and concurrence by the three judges.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the Agency for Health Care Administration's decision in a dispute with 200 Venice Operating LLC, which operates the Venice Center for Independent and Assisted Living. The appeal challenged an administrative action by the Agency; the appellate court issued a brief per curiam opinion on April 27, 2026, concluding the Agency's action should stand. The opinion provided no extended discussion and the three-judge panel concurred, leaving the Agency's ruling intact and the appellant's challenge unsuccessful.

The Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the Department of Revenue's action in an appeal brought by Mikesha Chantae Johnson. The court issued a short per curiam ruling simply stating AFFIRMED and cited Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.315. No written opinion or substantive reasoning is provided in the document; the judgment of the lower tribunal is therefore upheld. The decision was announced April 24, 2026, and participating judges concurred. Johnson proceeded pro se and the Department of Revenue was represented by the Attorney General's office.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal dismissed an original petition for a writ of mandamus filed by P.R. and M.Z. against the Department of Children and Families. The opinion is per curiam, issued April 21, 2026, and does not include substantive reasoning in the published entry. The court noted the decision is not final until any timely motion under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.330 or 9.331 is resolved. Judges Lewis, Winokur, and Neff concurred.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal dismissed Terrence Pellet’s petition for a writ of prohibition seeking relief against the Florida Department of Revenue, Child Support Program. The petition was filed in the court’s original jurisdiction, and the per curiam order simply states the petition is dismissed without published opinion. All three judges concurred. No additional reasoning, factual findings, or relief were set forth in the decision.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of the Division of Administrative Hearings in a dispute between Seventy7, LLC and the Florida Department of Revenue. The appeal challenged an administrative ruling, but the appellate court, in a per curiam decision with three judges concurring, concluded the lower administrative decision should stand. The opinion contains only the disposition 'AFFIRMED' without published reasoning in this document.

The Florida Supreme Court granted the Florida Bar’s petition to amend several Rules Regulating The Florida Bar to replace terminology: “chemical dependency” becomes “substance use disorder” and “psychological problems” becomes “mental health conditions.” The Court also revised a bylaw to allow the Board of Governors to establish programs for enhanced participation by minority members and updated funding restrictions for Bar assistance programs. The amendments are adopted as proposed, will appear in the appendix, and take effect June 15, 2026. One justice dissented, expressing concern about adopting changes tied to external organizations and potential policy consequences.

The Florida Supreme Court adopted several amendments to the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure proposed by The Florida Bar’s Appellate Court Rules Committee. The amendments update cross-references and wording, remove outdated references to the prior e-filing system, align paper filing and service requirements with recent changes to the Rules of General Practice and Judicial Administration, and revise certificate-of-service forms. The Court explained each change, incorporated consistency edits (for example replacing “pro se” with “unrepresented”), and set the effective date as July 1, 2026. No comments were received on the proposal.