Krock v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage — Fifth District affirmed without a written explanation

Case
Diane Mulhern Krock v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, HSBC Bank USA, National Association, as Trustee for Wells Fargo Asset Securities Corporation, Mortgage Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates Series 2007-PA2, the Russell Joseph Mulhern, Sr. Revocable Trust Dated October 7, 2009 as Amended by First Amendment Dated July 30, 2010, and the Estate of Russell Joseph Mulhern A/K/A Russell Joseph Mulhern, Sr.
Court
Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal
Judge
Makar; Soud; Boatwright
Date Decided
August 18, 2026
Docket No.
5D2025-2437
Topics
Appeals; Mortgage Litigation; Per Curiam Affirmance
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Diane Mulhern Krock, proceeding pro se, appealed from a decision of the Circuit Court for Marion County in litigation involving Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, HSBC Bank USA in its capacity as trustee for specified mortgage asset-backed pass-through certificates, the Russell Joseph Mulhern, Sr. Revocable Trust, and the Estate of Russell Joseph Mulhern. Circuit Judge Lisa Diane Herndon entered the decision under review.

The Fifth District’s opinion does not describe the underlying claims, the circuit court’s ruling, the facts of the dispute, or the arguments presented on appeal. Wells Fargo appeared through counsel; the remaining appellees made no appearance.

The Court’s Holding

The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court’s decision in a per curiam disposition. Judges Makar, Soud, and Boatwright concurred.

Because the court issued only the word “AFFIRMED” and provided no analysis, the opinion states no express legal rationale or rule beyond leaving the judgment under review intact. The disposition was not final until the resolution of any timely and authorized motion under Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.330 or 9.331.

Key Takeaways

  • The Fifth District affirmed the Marion County Circuit Court’s decision.
  • The appellate court supplied no factual discussion, legal analysis, or explanation for the affirmance.
  • The opinion therefore should not be read as resolving any legal issue beyond the result in this appeal.

Why It Matters

The decision ends the appeal in the appellees’ favor, subject to any authorized post-decision motion, while leaving the lower court’s ruling undisturbed. Its practical significance is case-specific because the Fifth District did not identify the issues presented or explain its reasoning.

✉️ 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