Videla v. Ogino — Third District affirmed without a written explanation

Case
Alejandro Videla v. Hitomi Ogino
Court
Florida Third District Court of Appeal
Judge
LINDSEY; BOKOR; GOODEN
Date Decided
September 24, 2026
Docket No.
3D26-0471
Topics
Appeals; Per Curiam Affirmance
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Alejandro Videla appealed a decision of the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County in lower-tribunal case No. 19-3921-FC-04. The circuit court proceeding was before Judge Denise Martinez-Scanziani.

Videla appeared without counsel in the appeal. Hitomi Ogino made no appearance. The appellate opinion does not describe the underlying dispute, the decision under review, or the arguments Videla raised.

The Court’s Holding

The Florida Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court’s decision.

The panel issued a per curiam opinion consisting only of the word “Affirmed.” It provided no reasoning and identified no legal rule or factual basis for the disposition.

Key Takeaways

  • The Third District affirmed the unspecified circuit court decision.
  • The ruling was unanimous and issued per curiam by a three-judge panel.
  • Because the opinion contains no analysis, it does not reveal the issues presented or the grounds for affirmance.

Why It Matters

The decision ends the appeal in the Third District unless altered through a timely post-decision proceeding. Its practical significance is limited by the absence of any explanation of the underlying controversy or the court’s 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Your email address will not be published.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