Nelsy Valdes v. Consolidated Real Estate Investments, etc.
The Third District affirmed, by citation opinion, a county court judgment in favor of the mobile home park owner in an eviction proceeding governed by the Florida Mobile Home Act. The panel rested the affirmance on section 723.061, Florida Statutes, and on its April 2026 decision in Owners of Trailers at Li'l Abner Trailer Park v. CREI Holdings, LLC, 51 Fla. L. Weekly D791 (Fla. 3d DCA Apr. 15, 2026), applying that recent precedent to a companion resident's appeal.
Key facts
- Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County (Judge Luis Perez-Medina), Lower Tribunal No. 25-88013-CC-05.
- The appellee, Consolidated Real Estate Investments, is the park-owner entity in the litigation arising out of the Li'l Abner mobile home park; appellant Nelsy Valdes was represented by Wesoloski Carlson, P.A. and David J. Winker, P.A.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Holdings
- Evictions of mobile home owners and tenants from a mobile home park are governed by the statutory grounds and procedures of section 723.061, Florida Statutes, and the Third District's…
Why it matters
This citation affirmance, issued together with its companion in Chanlatte, shows the Third District applying its April 2026 Li'l Abner decision as settled law to the stream of individual resident appeals flowing out of… — full analysis with a trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.