No Limit Mortgage Solutions — Sixth District affirmed without a written explanation

Case
No Limit Mortgage Solutions, Inc., and Corporacion Hospitalaria del Zulia, LLC, as Assignee for No Limit Mortgage Solutions, Inc. v. Dora Ameneiro Martinez a/k/a Dora Ameneiro, Ernesto Martinez, Bradford Emmer Trustee, Equitymax, Inc. Pension Plan, Equitymax, Inc. 401(k) Plan, OBX 2021-NQM1 Trust Co. Wilmington Savings Fund Society FBS, and State of Florida
Court
Florida Sixth District Court of Appeal
Judge
Brownlee; Gannam; Kamoutsas
Date Decided
November 3, 2026
Docket No.
6D2024-2403
Topics
Per Curiam Affirmance, Appellate Procedure
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

No Limit Mortgage Solutions, Inc., and Corporacion Hospitalaria del Zulia, LLC, as its assignee, appealed from the Circuit Court for Polk County. Circuit Judge Ellen S. Masters presided over the lower-court proceeding, which was assigned case number 2023-CA-005799.

The appellees included Dora Ameneiro Martinez, Ernesto Martinez, Bradford Emmer Trustee, two Equitymax retirement plans, OBX 2021-NQM1 Trust Co. Wilmington Savings Fund Society FBS, and the State of Florida. The appellate opinion does not describe the underlying dispute, the lower court’s ruling, the issues raised on appeal, or the parties’ arguments.

The Court’s Holding

The Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court in a per curiam decision. Judges Brownlee, Gannam, and Kamoutsas concurred.

The court provided no written reasoning and did not identify the particular ruling being affirmed. The opinion therefore establishes only that the result below remained in place, without explaining the legal or factual basis for the affirmance.

Key Takeaways

  • The Sixth District affirmed the lower court without a written explanation.
  • The opinion does not disclose the underlying facts, appellate issues, or nature of the challenged ruling.
  • The decision was issued per curiam, with Judges Brownlee, Gannam, and Kamoutsas concurring.

Why It Matters

The disposition ends the appeal at the panel-decision stage while leaving the lower court’s result undisturbed. Because the court supplied no reasoning, the opinion offers no articulated rule or analysis for attorneys to apply in other cases.

✉️ 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