LP Glass Technologies, Inc. v. Barron Development Corporation
Docket 4D2025-2951
Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research
- Filed
- Jurisdiction
- Florida
- Court
- District Court of Appeal of Florida
- Type
- Opinion
- Case type
- Civil
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Docket
- 4D2025-2951
Consolidated appeal of nonfinal orders from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County
Summary
The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed two consolidated nonfinal circuit court orders in a civil dispute between LP Glass Technologies, Inc. (appellant) and Barron Development Corporation (appellee). The opinion is per curiam, brief, and provides no substantive reasoning in the published entry; it simply states the appellate disposition as affirmed, with concurrence by all three judges. The decision is not final pending any timely rehearing motion. No further factual or legal detail was provided in the opinion itself.
Issue Decided
- Whether the nonfinal circuit court orders should be affirmed on appeal
Court's Reasoning
The published entry provides no substantive explanation of the court's reasoning; it issues a per curiam affirmation without detailing the legal standards or factual analysis. The panel unanimously concurred, and the mandate awaits the resolution of any timely motion for rehearing.
Parties
- Appellant
- LP Glass Technologies, Inc.
- Appellee
- Barron Development Corporation
- Attorney
- Hae Jung Kim
- Attorney
- Kieran F. O’Connor
- Attorney
- Morgan Lyle Weinstein
- Judge
- Keathan Briscoe Frink
- Judge
- Nickolaus Hunter Davis
Key Dates
- Decision date
- 2026-04-30
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consider filing a motion for rehearing
If the appellant believes there are grounds, they should file a timely motion for rehearing in the Fourth District to challenge the affirmation.
- 2
Consult appellate counsel
Parties should consult their attorneys to evaluate whether to seek rehearing or further review and to determine tactical next steps in the underlying circuit court proceedings.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The appellate court affirmed the circuit court's nonfinal orders in favor of the appellee, issuing a brief per curiam opinion.
- Does this opinion explain why the court affirmed?
- No; the opinion contains no substantive reasoning or analysis, only the affirmative disposition and concurrence.
- Is this decision final?
- Not yet—it's not final until any timely motion for rehearing is resolved.
- Who is affected by this decision?
- The immediate parties, LP Glass Technologies, Inc. (appellant) and Barron Development Corporation (appellee), are affected; broader implications are not explained in the opinion.
The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.
Full Filing Text
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
LP GLASS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
Appellant,
v.
BARRON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,
Appellee.
Nos. 4D2025-2951 and 4D2025-3537
[April 30, 2026]
Consolidated appeal of a nonfinal orders from the Circuit Court for the
Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Keathan Briscoe Frink and
Nickolaus Hunter Davis, Judges; L.T. Case Nos.
062025CA000776AXXXCE and 062025CA001241AXXXCE.
Hae Jung Kim and Kieran F. O’Connor of O’Connor & Stolinas Law
Group, PLLC, Orlando, for appellant.
Morgan Lyle Weinstein of Twig, Trade, & Tribunal, PLLC, Fort
Lauderdale, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed.
CIKLIN, LEVINE and CONNER, JJ., concur.
* * *
Not final until disposition of timely-filed motion for rehearing.