Live courthouse data across 10 states. Pro users get alerted instantly on every filing. Get started

Maschelle Adrianne Pugh v. Eric Paul Pugh

Docket 4D2025-1825

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

FamilyAffirmed
Filed
Jurisdiction
Florida
Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Type
Opinion
Case type
Family
Disposition
Affirmed
Docket
4D2025-1825

Appeal from a circuit court family case (case no. 562024DR000181AXXXHC) in the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Martin County.

Summary

The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's order in a family-law matter between Maschelle Adrianne Pugh (appellant, pro se) and Eric Paul Pugh (appellee). The appeal from the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit (Martin County) was reviewed and the appellate panel issued a per curiam decision simply stating 'Affirmed.' No additional reasoning or changes to the lower court's judgment were provided in the published entry. The decision will become final after any timely motion for rehearing is resolved.

Issue Decided

  • Whether the trial court's decision in the underlying family-law proceeding should be reversed on appeal.

Court's Reasoning

The appellate court issued a brief per curiam disposition affirming the lower court's decision without publishing substantive reasoning in this entry. Because the court affirmed, it implicitly found no reversible error in the trial court's proceedings or judgment. The opinion contains no expanded analysis or citation of legal authorities in this entry.

Parties

Appellant
Maschelle Adrianne Pugh
Appellee
Eric Paul Pugh
Judge
Rebecca White
Attorney
Scott D. Glassman

Key Dates

District Court decision date
2026-04-16

What You Should Do Next

  1. 1

    Consider filing a motion for rehearing

    If the appellant believes there are grounds, she should file a timely motion for rehearing in the district court according to the appellate rules and deadlines.

  2. 2

    Consult appellate counsel

    Given the brief disposition and lack of stated reasoning, consult an attorney experienced in appeals to assess potential grounds for rehearing or further review.

  3. 3

    Monitor rehearing deadline and potential further review

    If rehearing is denied, determine whether to seek review by the Florida Supreme Court and prepare required jurisdictional filings within applicable time limits.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the court decide?
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's ruling in the family-law case, leaving the lower-court decision in place.
Who is affected by this decision?
The immediate parties, Maschelle Adrianne Pugh (appellant) and Eric Paul Pugh (appellee), are affected because the trial-court outcome stands.
Does this decision explain the court's reasoning?
No; the entry is a short per curiam disposition that simply states 'Affirmed' and does not include substantive legal analysis.
Can the appellant take further action?
Yes; the appellant may file a timely motion for rehearing in the district court, and if that is denied, may consider seeking review in the Florida Supreme Court if jurisdictional criteria are met.

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

                   MASCHELLE ADRIANNE PUGH,
                           Appellant,

                                    v.

                          ERIC PAUL PUGH,
                              Appellee.

                          No. 4D2025-1825

                             [April 16, 2026]

  Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit,
Martin  County;   Rebecca    White,    Judge;    L.T.  Case     No.
562024DR000181AXXXHC.

  Maschelle Adrianne Pugh, Jupiter, pro se.

  Scott D. Glassman of Law Office of Scott Glassman, P.A., West Palm
Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

  Affirmed.

KLINGENSMITH, SHAW and LOTT, JJ., concur.

                         *          *           *

  Not final until disposition of timely-filed motion for rehearing.