Robert Vidal v. Barclays Bank Delaware

OCR transcription; preserved printed pages are authoritative

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT

ROBERT VIDAL,
Appellant,

Vv.

BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE,
Appellee.

No. 4D2025-1099
[April 22, 2026]

Appeal from the County Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St.
Lucie County; Edmond Warren Alonzo III, Judge; L.T. Case No.
562024CC000678AXXXHC.

Robert Vidal, Port St. Lucie, pro se.
No appearance for appellee.
PER CURIAM.

We affirm the county court’s final judgment and order denying the
debtor’s motion for new trial. The debtor failed to preserve the asserted
errors, failed to provide an adequate record for review, and failed to
demonstrate reversible error. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of
Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“Without a record of the
trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the
underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court’s judgment
is not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory. Without
knowing the factual context, neither can an appellate court reasonably
conclude that the trial judge so misconceived the law as to require
reversal.”).

Affirmed.

KLINGENSMITH, SHAW and LoTT, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely-filed motion for rehearing.