Tolipov Q. Murodbek v. Daria Bojorque
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledAugust 27, 2026
Docket3D2025-1449
StatusPublished
๐ฐ News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed August 27, 2026.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D25-1449
Lower Tribunal No. 21-3067-FC-04
________________
Murodbek Q. Tolipov,
Appellant,
vs.
Daria Bojorque,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Veronica
Diaz, Judge.
Altawil Law Group, P.A., and Ramie Altawil, for appellant.
Daria Borjorque (Boynton Beach), for appellee.
Before FERNANDEZ, GORDO and BOKOR, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d
1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (โWithout a record of the trial proceedings, the
appellate court can not [sic] properly resolve the underlying factual issues so
as to conclude that the trial courtโs 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. The trial court should have been affirmed
because the record brought forward by the appellant is inadequate to
demonstrate reversible error.โ); Olivas v. Morales, 420 So. 3d 1091, 1091
(Fla. 3d DCA 2025) (โ[The Father] contends that the trial court erred in not
granting him exclusive timesharing during the summer break. However, the
record on appeal does not include a transcript of the final hearing upon which
the trial court based its factual findings and, ultimately, its final judgment.
This failure is fatal to [the Fatherโs] claim on appeal.โ); Fla. Fam. L. R. P.
12.530(a) (โTo preserve for appeal a challenge to the failure of the trial court
to make required findings of fact in the final judgment, a party must raise that
issue in a motion for rehearing under this rule.โ); Olivas, 420 So. 3d at 1092
n.1 (โ[T]he final judgment, and the final parenting plan approved by the trial
court, fails to โ[d]escribe in adequate detail the methods and technologies
that the parents will use to communicate with the child,โ as required by
2
61.13(2)(b)4., Fla. Stat. (2025). However, the record fails to establish
whether the issue was addressed in the trial court. Moreover, it was not
preserved by a motion for rehearing . . . . Venezia v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.,
306 So. 3d 1096, 1098 n.3 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (observing that, generally,
the failure to properly raise and preserve a claim in the trial court waives the
issue on appeal) (citations omitted). We therefore do not reach the merits of
this issue.โ).
3