Simpson v. Daniels — affirmed the nonfinal order without a written explanation

Case
Civica Simpson v. Jason M. Daniels
Court
Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal
Judge
Edwards; Kilbane; MacIver
Date Decided
September 8, 2026
Docket No.
5D2025-3903
Topics
Nonfinal Appeal, Family Law, Per Curiam Affirmance
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Civica Simpson appealed a nonfinal order entered by the Circuit Court for Seminole County in a case involving Jason M. Daniels. Circuit Judge Christopher Sprysenski entered the order under review.

Simpson represented herself on appeal. Daniels made no appearance. The appellate opinion does not identify the substance of the challenged order or describe the parties’ arguments.

The Court’s Holding

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

The court issued a per curiam affirmance without explaining its reasoning or announcing any rule of law. Judges Edwards, Kilbane, and MacIver concurred.

Key Takeaways

  • The Fifth District affirmed the nonfinal order under review.
  • The decision provides no factual discussion, legal analysis, or explanation for the affirmance.
  • The opinion does not establish a stated rule for application in other cases.

Why It Matters

The ruling leaves the circuit court’s nonfinal order in place. Because the appellate court supplied no reasoning, the opinion offers no guidance about the underlying dispute or the legal basis for 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Your email address will not be published.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