Max v. Accelerated Inventory Management — Fifth District affirmed without a written explanation

Case
Courtney Max v. Accelerated Inventory Management, LLC
Court
Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal
Judge
Soud; Boatwright; Kilbane
Date Decided
September 8, 2026
Docket No.
5D2025-2438
Topics
Appellate Procedure; Nonfinal Appeal; Per Curiam Affirmance
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Courtney Max appealed pro se from a nonfinal order of the County Court for Lake County in litigation against Accelerated Inventory Management, LLC. County Judge Carla R. Pepperman entered the order under review.

Accelerated Inventory Management did not appear in the appeal. The Fifth District’s opinion does not describe the underlying dispute, identify the challenged order, or state the arguments Max raised.

The Court’s Holding

The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the county court’s nonfinal order.

The court issued a per curiam affirmance without analysis. Accordingly, the opinion supplies no stated legal reasoning or substantive rule beyond leaving the challenged order in place.

Key Takeaways

  • The Fifth District affirmed the nonfinal order under review.
  • Judges Soud, Boatwright, and Kilbane concurred in the per curiam disposition.
  • The opinion does not reveal the underlying facts, issues presented, or grounds for affirmance.

Why It Matters

The decision ends this nonfinal appeal by leaving the county court’s ruling undisturbed. Because the court provided no reasoning, the opinion offers no articulated guidance on the substantive or procedural issues that may have been presented.

✉️ 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Your email address will not be published.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