Oxendine v. Mullins — Fifth District affirmed without a written explanation

Case
Delvin Oxendine, Jr. v. Christie Mullins
Court
Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal
Judge
Wallis; Edwards; Kilbane
Date Decided
November 3, 2026
Docket No.
5D2025-2887
Topics
Appeals, Per Curiam Affirmance, Family Law
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Delvin Oxendine, Jr. appealed from a decision of the Circuit Court for Putnam County in litigation against Christie Mullins. Circuit Judge Rose Marie Karadsheh Preddy presided below.

Both Oxendine and Mullins represented themselves on appeal. The Fifth District’s opinion does not describe the underlying dispute, the trial court’s ruling, the issues raised, or the parties’ arguments.

The Court’s Holding

The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court’s decision. The court issued a per curiam affirmance without a written explanation.

Because the opinion provides no reasoning, it announces no express rule of law and does not reveal the grounds on which the lower court’s decision was upheld. Judges Wallis, Edwards, and Kilbane concurred.

Key Takeaways

  • The Fifth District affirmed the Putnam County circuit court’s decision.
  • The court gave no explanation for its ruling and did not discuss the underlying facts or appellate issues.
  • The opinion was not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.330 or 9.331.

Why It Matters

The ruling leaves the circuit court’s decision in place. Its broader significance is limited because the Fifth District did not provide facts, legal analysis, or an articulated holding beyond affirmance.

✉️ 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Your email address will not be published.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