BLNK HOLDINGS, LLC v. MARK HERSKOWITZ

Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed June 15, 2022.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D21-1098
Lower Tribunal No. 21-4452
________________
BLNK Holdings, LLC, et al.,
Appellants,
vs.
Mark Herskowitz,
Appellee.
An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade
County, William Thomas, Judge.
Bales Sommers & Klein, P.A., and Richard M. Bales, Jr. and Jason
Klein, for appellants.
Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr LLP, and Franklin L. Zemel and Alan R.
Poppe and Ariel R. Deray (Fort Lauderdale), for appellee.
Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and EMAS and BOKOR, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Aills v. Boemi, 29 So. 3d 1105, 1108 (Fla. 2010)
(explaining that “[i]n order for an argument to be cognizable on appeal, it
must be the specific contention asserted as legal ground for the objection,
exception, or motion below” (citation omitted)). See also Fleischer v.
Fleischer, 586 So. 2d 1253, 1254 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (“The only exception
to the raise-it-or-waive-it rule is for fundamental error. ‘Fundamental’ error,
in this sense, refers to error that goes to the very heart of the judicial process,
not to mistakes as to which arguably correct law or rule to apply, or as to the
application of such a rule of law to the facts in the case.”); Marks v.
Delcastillo, 386 So. 2d 1259, 1267 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) (explaining that the
fundamental error exception does not apply where a party challenges a
court’s admission of or failure to admit deposition testimony since an alleged
evidentiary error of this kind does not go to the heart or foundation of the
case).
2