Florida Court of Appeal Affirms Ruling in Perry v. Perry Case

The Florida First District Court of Appeal, on November 10, 2026, affirmed a decision from the Circuit Court for Leon County in the case of Raymond Perry v. Phillip E. Perry, et al., indicating the appellate court upheld the lower court's ruling through a per curiam affirmance.

This per curiam affirmance (PCA) signifies that the appellate court found no reversible error in the lower court's decision, reinforcing the finality of judgments at the trial level unless a clear legal or factual mistake is demonstrated. For practitioners, PCAs, while not providing detailed legal reasoning, are common in Florida's appellate system and underscore the high bar for overturning trial court decisions, emphasizing the importance of a well-developed trial record.

In Florida, the District Courts of Appeal are intermediate appellate courts, reviewing final judgments and certain non-final orders from circuit courts. A per curiam affirmance means the court found no error warranting a written opinion, often used when the issues are straightforward, or the lower court's reasoning is deemed sufficient. This highlights the principle of judicial economy and the deference given to trial court findings of fact, with the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure governing the process and Circuit Courts acting as courts of general jurisdiction.

The appellant in this matter is Raymond Perry, and the appellees are Phillip E. Perry, et al. The appeal originated from the Circuit Court for Leon County, where Judge Angela Cote Dempsey presided over the initial proceedings. The First District Court of Appeal issued the per curiam decision, concluding the appellate review.

Attorneys practicing in Florida should recognize that per curiam affirmances are a frequent outcome in appellate litigation, particularly in cases where the trial court's application of law to fact is not clearly erroneous. This reinforces the critical importance of building a strong, error-free record at the trial court level, as appellate courts are unlikely to disturb findings of fact or discretionary rulings without a compelling showing of legal error. Practitioners should also be aware that PCAs do not establish binding precedent for future cases.