Court Opinion

ID: 9839607
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-13 16:04:46.341184+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:33.579826
License: Public Domain

Third District Court of Appeal
                               State of Florida

                     Opinion filed September 13, 2023.
       Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                            ________________

                              No. 3D23-157
                        Lower Tribunal No. 22-3470
                           ________________

                      TheDigital.Support LLC, etc.,
                               Appellant,

                                     vs.

           Smarketing Technologies Corporation, etc., et al.,
                             Appellees.

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

      PAG Law PLLC, and Patricia Acosta and Alexandra Goodstone, for
appellant.

    EPGD Attorneys at Law, P.A., and Justin Hassani and Oscar A.
Gomez, for appellees.

Before SCALES, HENDON and MILLER, JJ.

     PER CURIAM.
     Affirmed. See Bank of New York Mellon v. One Seagrove Place

Owners Ass'n, 276 So. 3d 486, 487 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019) (“The Bank’s motion

set forth a colorable claim [under rule 1.540], and the trial court held an

evidentiary hearing. But the Bank furnished no transcript of the hearing in

the appendix filed in this appeal. In the absence of a transcript, we must

presume that the trial court's order denying the Bank's motion ‘was based on

additional evidence adduced at the hearing.’ We thus AFFIRM the order

denying relief from the . . . judgment.” (quoting Snowden v. Wells Fargo

Bank, 172 So. 3d 506, 508 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015))).

                                     2