Long v. LeBlanc — Affirmance of Nonfinal Order Without Written Opinion

Case
Adam Long v. Abbie LeBlanc
Court
District Court of Appeal of the State of Florida, Fourth District
Date Decided
July 2, 2026
Docket No.
4D2025-3238
Topics
Domestic Relations; Appellate Procedure; Nonfinal Orders
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Adam Long appealed a nonfinal order issued by Judge Paul Anthony Damico of the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach County. Long appeared pro se (representing himself without counsel) in the appellate proceedings, while Abbie LeBlanc, the appellee, did not file an appearance. The underlying case was designated as a domestic relations matter based on the trial court docket designation.

A nonfinal or interlocutory order is one that does not finally resolve all issues in a case but may be reviewed on appeal. Long pursued his appeal to the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Florida’s intermediate appellate court serving that region, challenging the trial court’s order.

The Court’s Holding

The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court’s nonfinal order in a brief per curiam decision. The court provided no written opinion, legal analysis, or explanation for its affirmance, simply stating “Affirmed” with notation that Justices Gross, May, and Levine concurred.

By affirming, the court left the trial judge’s order in place. The opinion explicitly notes that the decision is “not final until disposition of timely-filed motion for rehearing,” preserving the right of either party to petition for reconsideration of the appellate judgment within applicable time limits.

Key Takeaways

  • The trial court’s nonfinal order has been affirmed on appeal.
  • The appellate court issued no written opinion explaining its reasoning or addressing the parties’ arguments.
  • Affirmances without opinion are permitted when an appellate court determines the lower court’s decision is correct and requires no elaboration.
  • The decision may be reconsidered through a timely motion for rehearing.

Why It Matters

For the parties, this decision resolves the appeal and leaves the trial court’s nonfinal order in effect. However, the absence of a written opinion means this case provides no precedential value or legal guidance to other litigants or lower courts facing similar issues.

This case exemplifies how appellate courts manage their dockets by issuing summary affirmances when they find no reversible error. Either party retains the option to petition for reconsideration through a motion for rehearing before the decision becomes final.

✉️ 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