Skip to content

Steven Baez v. David Quintana

Court
Florida Third District Court of Appeal
Decided
September 3, 2026
Docket No.
2026-0190

Judges: LINDSEY; MILLER; REBULL

Disposition: affirmed

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed September 3, 2026. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

No. 3D26-0190

Lower Tribunal No. 21-24941-CA-01

Steven Baez, Appellant,

vs.

David Quintana, Appellee.

An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Migna Sanchez-Llorens, Judge.

Hoekstra Law Firm, and Jacob Cable (Winter Garden), for appellant.

Zarco Einhorn Salkowski, P.A., and Himanshu M. Patel, for appellee.

Before LINDSEY, MILLER, and REBULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Original opinion page 2
Original opinion page 2
2 Affirmed. See Lazcar Int’l, Inc. v. Caraballo, 957 So. 2d 1191, 1193 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (“Absent competent substantial evidence of some exceptional circumstance explaining the delay, a six-week delay in filing a motion to vacate a default after receiving notice constitutes a lack of due diligence as a matter of law.” (internal citation omitted)); Rodriguez v. Falcones, 314 So. 3d 469, 471 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (“The discretion reposed in the trial judge by Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.540 is of the broadest scope and in order to reverse a judge’s ruling thereunder, there must be a showing of a gross abuse of discretion.” (citation omitted)); see also Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“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.”).

Opinion text and original PDF from Florida Third District Court of Appeal · Source opinion

Ask Ella about this case

General legal information, not legal advice. Jurisio is not a law firm.