Florida Second DCA: Karac v Fidelity National Information Appeal Filed

• Mladenko Karac has filed an appeal against Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) with the Florida Second District Court of Appeal.
• The appeal, case number 2D2025-1811, was filed on November 13, 2026.
• This case originated from a decision by the Commission on Human Relations.
• Mladenko Karac is representing himself pro se in this appellate proceeding.
• Counsel for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) is listed as Cristine Original document.

Without access to the court's decision, the appellate briefs, or the underlying facts of the case, it is impossible to ascertain any specific legal implications or precedents that might arise from this particular appeal.

A formal appeal has been initiated before the DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT, concerning the matter of Mladenko Karac v. Fidelity National Information Services, Inc., often referred to as FIS. The appellant in this proceeding is Mladenko Karac, who is representing himself without the aid of legal counsel, a status known as pro se. This action represents a continuation of a legal dispute that originated from a prior determination made by the Commission on Human Relations. The case has been officially docketed under the appellate number 2D2025-1811.

Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) is named as the appellee in this appellate action. The record indicates that counsel for the appellee is identified as Cristine Original document. The date associated with the filing of this appeal is November 13, 2026. This procedural step signifies that the appellant, Mladenko Karac, is seeking a review of the Commission on Human Relations' decision by a higher judicial authority, challenging its findings or conclusions. The process of an appeal involves presenting arguments to the appellate court, which then evaluates whether errors of law or procedure occurred in the initial administrative proceeding.

The appeal in Karac v Fidelity National Information arises from a decision rendered by the Commission on Human Relations, an administrative body in Florida with jurisdiction over matters pertaining to human rights and anti-discrimination laws. Decisions from such commissions often involve complex factual determinations and legal interpretations regarding alleged violations of state statutes or regulations. The act of appealing such a decision to the Florida Second District Court of Appeal places the case within the established framework for judicial review of administrative actions.

The Florida Second District Court of Appeal functions as an intermediate appellate tribunal, meaning it reviews cases that have already been heard and decided by a lower court or administrative agency. Its primary role is not to conduct a new trial or re-evaluate facts, but rather to examine the record of the prior proceedings for legal errors. This includes scrutinizing whether the Commission on Human Relations applied the correct legal standards, whether its findings were supported by substantial evidence, and whether due process was afforded to all parties. The specific issues that Mladenko Karac is raising on appeal against FIS are not detailed in the public record of the filing itself, but they would necessarily relate to the Commission's original ruling.

The current public record for Mladenko Karac v FIS provides only the foundational procedural details of the appeal, including the identities of the appellant and appellee, the specific court, and the case number 2D2025-1811. While it confirms the appeal originated from the Commission on Human Relations, the substantive content of the Commission's decision, the specific legal questions presented for review, or the arguments advanced by Mladenko Karac, who is proceeding pro se, are not disclosed. Similarly, the detailed legal position of Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) as the appellee remains unarticulated in this initial filing.

Consequently, without access to the court's decision, the appellate briefs, or the underlying facts of the case, it is impossible to ascertain any specific legal implications or precedents that might arise from this particular appeal. The November 13, 2026, date merely signifies the formal commencement of the appellate process. The significance of this case, including any potential impact on human relations law or administrative procedure, will only become apparent once the Florida Second District Court of Appeal issues a substantive ruling or provides further details regarding the issues under consideration. This filing represents a critical procedural step, but not a substantive legal outcome.

This article provides only the case caption and procedural details of an appeal from the Commission on Human Relations to the Florida Second District Court of Appeal. Without the content of the court's decision or the issues on appeal, there is no actionable legal implication for lawyers or compliance officers.

Source: Original reporting via court filing.