What did the appeals court decide?

The appeals court affirmed the trial court's judgment, meaning it found no reversible error in the lower court's decision.

Who is affected by this decision?

The immediate parties affected are appellant Peter A. Liggatt and appellee Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company; the trial court's judgment remains in effect between them.

Why did the court affirm?

The published document is a short per curiam affirmance and does not include substantive reasoning or explanation for the decision.

Can this be appealed further?

A party may seek further review, for example by filing a motion for rehearing in the district court or seeking discretionary review in the Florida Supreme Court, subject to applicable deadlines and standards for review.

Peter A. Liggatt v. Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company

Docket 6D2025-0940

Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research

CivilAffirmed

Filed: Apr 21, 2026 · 1 week ago
Jurisdiction: Florida
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Type: Opinion
Case type: Civil
Disposition: Affirmed
Docket: 6D2025-0940

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County in a civil action (Lower Tribunal No. 2023-CA-014288).

Summary

The Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment in a civil case between borrower Peter A. Liggatt (appellant) and Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company (appellee). The appellate panel issued a brief per curiam decision, noting the appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County and concluding that the lower court's ruling should stand. No extended opinion or reasoning was published in the document; the court simply entered judgment affirming the lower tribunal's decision and the three judges concurred.

Issue Decided

Whether the trial court's judgment should be reversed on appeal in the dispute between the parties.

Court's Reasoning

The opinion is per curiam and provides no substantive explanation for the decision; the court affirmed the lower court's judgment without publishing its reasoning in this brief disposition. Because no legal analysis appears in the text, the operative reason given is simply the court's conclusion to affirm.

Parties

Appellant: Peter A. Liggatt
Appellee: Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company
Judge: Patricia L. Strowbridge
Attorney: Anthony N. Legendre, II
Attorney: Robert R. Edwards
Attorney: David Rosenberg

Key Dates

Decision date: 2026-04-21

What You Should Do Next

1
Consider filing a motion for rehearing
The appellant has the option to file a motion for rehearing in the District Court within the deadline if they believe the court overlooked material points; check local rules for the exact time limit.
2
Evaluate petition for discretionary review
If rehearing is denied or not pursued, the appellant may consult counsel about seeking discretionary review by the Florida Supreme Court, which requires showing the case involves a question of great public importance or conflict.
3
Comply with or enforce the affirmed judgment
The prevailing party should take steps to enforce the trial court's judgment if relief was awarded, and the losing party should consult counsel about compliance and any time-sensitive obligations.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the appeals court decide?: The appeals court affirmed the trial court's judgment, meaning it found no reversible error in the lower court's decision.
Who is affected by this decision?: The immediate parties affected are appellant Peter A. Liggatt and appellee Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company; the trial court's judgment remains in effect between them.
Why did the court affirm?: The published document is a short per curiam affirmance and does not include substantive reasoning or explanation for the decision.
Can this be appealed further?: A party may seek further review, for example by filing a motion for rehearing in the district court or seeking discretionary review in the Florida Supreme Court, subject to applicable deadlines and standards for review.

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

SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
                       STATE OF FLORIDA
                      _____________________________

                           Case No. 6D2025-0940
                     Lower Tribunal No. 2023-CA-014288
                      _____________________________

                              PETER A. LIGGATT,

                                  Appellant,

                                      v.

                    GOLDMAN SACHS MORTGAGE COMPANY,

                                 Appellee.
                      _____________________________

               Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County.
                        Patricia L. Strowbridge, Judge.

                                April 21, 2026

PER CURIAM.

      AFFIRMED.

STARGEL, GANNAM and PRATT, JJ., concur.


Anthony N. Legendre, II, of Law Offices of Legendre & Legendre, PLLC, Maitland,
for Appellant.

Robert R. Edwards and David Rosenberg, of Robertson, Anschutz, Schneid, Crane
& Partners, PLLC, Boca Raton, for Appellee.


 NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING
             AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED