Watkins v. Teves — Fourth District affirmed without a written opinion

Case
Clement Watkins v. Graciela Teves
Court
Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal
Judge
CIKLIN (Charlie Crist, 2008); Conner (Rick Scott, 2011)
Date Decided
July 30, 2026
Docket No.
4D2025-1715
Topics
Appeals, Per Curiam Affirmance, Family Law
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Clement Watkins appealed an order or judgment entered by the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit in Broward County in a case involving Graciela Teves. The opinion does not describe the underlying dispute, the challenged ruling, or Watkins’s arguments on appeal.

Watkins represented himself. Teves did not appear in the appellate proceeding.

The Court’s Holding

The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court’s decision in a per curiam disposition.

The court provided no reasoning and did not identify the legal grounds supporting affirmance. Judges Ciklin, Conner, and Klingensmith concurred.

Key Takeaways

  • The circuit court’s ruling was affirmed.
  • The appellate court issued no written analysis of the facts or legal issues.
  • The opinion was not final until disposition of any timely filed motion for rehearing.

Why It Matters

Because the court affirmed without explanation, the decision resolves this appeal but offers practitioners no substantive guidance about the underlying dispute or the legal basis for the result.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top