Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed August 20, 2026. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
No. 3D25-2283
Lower Tribunal No. 25-156330-CC-05
Sharrieff Corey Pope and Yoselyn Cardozo, Appellants,
vs.
DT Residential North, LLC and DT Residential South, LLC, Appellees.
An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Miesha Darrough, Judge.
Sharrieff Corey Pope and Yoselyn Cardozo, in proper persons.
The MGFD Law Firm, and Whitney Helen Daly (Palm Harbor), for appellees.
Before SCALES, C.J., and MILLER and GOODEN, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
2 Affirmed. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“When there are issues of fact the appellant necessarily asks the reviewing court to draw conclusions about the evidence. Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court’s judgment is not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory. Without knowing the factual context, neither can an appellate court reasonably conclude that the trial judge so misconceived the law as to require reversal. The trial court should have been affirmed because the record brought forward by the appellant is inadequate to demonstrate reversible error.”); see also Johnston v. Hudlett, 32 So. 3d 700, 704 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (holding a party’s objection to evidence is waived by not asserting at trial); State v. Hampton, 44 So. 3d 661, 665–66 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (“[A]s a general rule, a defendant is expected to make a contemporaneous objection to issues arising during trial. This is true, in part, because the objection gives the trial court and opposing counsel an opportunity to prevent or correct the error. Evidence, which may seem irrelevant and thereby objectionable when the foundational evidence is weak, may become quite relevant if the party seeking its admission is permitted to ask a few additional questions.”).