Case law

G.W.B. v. J.S.W.

20 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 376 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jul 20, 1995

In addition, the trial court found almost no testimony to establish that G.W.B. exhibited any feeling for the unborn child. … We find that by this language the Legislature clearly did not limit “conduct” to financial support. Conduct generally connotes behavior.

Trepal v. State

846 So. 2d 405 · Supreme Court of Florida · Mar 6, 2003

To qualify as new evidence, it must be admissible. Jones v. State, 709 So.2d 512, 521 (Fla. 1998). The OIG report would be inadmissible hearsay. See Norton v. … A sub-issue as to Diana Carr has to do with the fact that defense counsel did not elicit the fact that she was testifying under immunity.

State ex rel. Attorney-General v. Johnson

30 Fla. 499 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jun 15, 1892

These duties are clearly prescribed by the act of May 25th, 1889, (secs. 342 and 173, R. S.) … thirty-days before the day of election, their poll or capitation taxes for two years next preceding such election, as shown by the lists furnished to the supervisor by the Tax Collector, and only such persons shall be deemed qualified

Jews for Jesus, Inc. v. Rapp

33 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 849 · Supreme Court of Florida · Oct 23, 2008

"`The interest protected' in permitting recovery for placing the plaintiff in a false light `is clearly that of reputation, with the same overtones of mental distress as in defamation.'" … Tribune Co., 108 Fla. 177 , 146 So. 234, 238 (1933) (qualified privilege for defamatory statements republished by a defendant); Abraham v.

Nohrr v. Brevard County Educational Fac. Auth.

247 So. 2d 304 · Supreme Court of Florida · Apr 21, 1971

The finding of the Legislature is determinative, and Defendant has failed to show that such determination was so clearly wrong as to be beyond the power of the Legislature. Similar laws have been upheld by other courts. … This demonstrates clear legislative intent that such trustee need not qualify under Florida law relating to depositaries for public money.

& SC16-341 Renaldo Devon McGirth v. State of Florida & Renaldo & Devon McGirth v. Julie L. Jones, etc.

209 So. 3d 1146 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jan 26, 2017

First, regardless of McGirth’s background, the record demonstrates that he understood legal concepts and could articulate his position clearly. … Our review of the evaluations, as well as the entire postconviction record, leads us to conclude that a reasonable doubt as to McGirth’s competency had not been established.

The Bank of New York Mellon, etc. v. Dianne D. Glenville A/K/A Diane D. Glenville A/K/A Diane Glenville

252 So. 3d 1120 · Supreme Court of Florida · Sep 6, 2018

Finally, paragraph (c) provides, in part, that “[i]f no claim is filed during the 60-day period, the clerk shall appoint a surplus trustee from a list of qualified surplus trustees as authorized in s. 45.034. … Section 45.031 is clearly the more general statute. Section 45.031 is generally titled “Judicial sales procedure” and covers far more than foreclosure surpluses.

Rodriguez v. State

753 So. 2d 29 · Supreme Court of Florida · Feb 3, 2000

On this record, we cannot say that the trial court's ruling was clearly erroneous. … As an evidentiary principle, the concept of "opening the door" allows the admission of otherwise inadmissible testimony to "qualify, explain, or limit" testimony or evidence previously admitted. Tompkins v.

In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure

84 So. 3d 192 · Supreme Court of Florida · Nov 3, 2011

change] (3) Appeals to the district courts of appeal of non-final orders are limited to those that (A)-(B) [No change] (C) determine (i)-(vi) [No change] (vii) that, as a matter of law, a party is not entitled to absolute or qualified … immunity in a civil rights claim arising under federal law; — or (viii) that a governmental entity has taken action that has inordinately burdened real property within the meaning of section 70.001 (6)(a), Florida Statutes

In re Inquiry Concerning a Judge, No. 96-141

22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 304 · Supreme Court of Florida · May 30, 1997

The policy reasons for the confidentiality of the original complaint clearly outweigh any benefit the discovery of *752 it could have in view of the discovery right provided by rule 12. … Before reporting findings of fact to this Court, the JQC must conclude that they are established by clear and convincing evidence. In re McAllister, 646 So.2d 173, 177 (Fla.1994).

Freeman v. State

761 So. 2d 1055 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jun 8, 2000

Freeman further complains defense counsel was ineffective in failing to produce a qualified expert witness to testify to his drug and alcohol problems. … These issues are a thinly veiled attempt to have an appeal on the merits, which is clearly not the purpose of a habeas petition.

Hegwood v. State

575 So. 2d 170 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jan 17, 1991

The United States Supreme Court later qualified *172 this holding, "to reiterate a critical point, the prosecutor will not have violated his constitutional duty of disclosure unless his omission is of sufficient significance … In my opinion, the Tedder standard has clearly been met in this case.

Inerarity v. Curtis

4 Fla. 175 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jan 15, 1851

Hunt, 4 Howard’s Reports, 589, says that there is no ground-for .qualifying the opinion expressed in that case, believing it to be sound and incontrovertible ; but deem it proper, in the reiteration of that opinion, to do … Thus the Superior Court, as a State Court, became rightfully possessed of jurisdiction of the cause — the subject matter was clearly within its jurisdiction,, and the defendant, by his appearance by counsel, had acknowledged

Anderson v. City of Ocala

67 Fla. 204 · Supreme Court of Florida · Mar 12, 1914

Suffice it to say that the principle laid down in the cited case has been much modified or qualified in subsequent decisions rendered by the same court. See French v. Barber Asphalt Paving Co., 181 U. S. 325 , 21 Sup. … Rep. 185 , “Even if the failure to state in the ordinance the estimated cost of the curb and gutters as required by the City Charter, may have been a ground for arresting the work when undertaken by the city, it is clearly

Shingleton v. Bussey

223 So. 2d 713 · Supreme Court of Florida · May 28, 1969

insurers the substantive right to insert "no joinder" clauses in liability policies there is no basis in law for insurers to assume they have such contractual right as a special privilege not granted other citizens to contract immunity … If it should clearly appear in pretrial procedures that joinder of the insurer interposes issues between insured and insurer in particular case situations likely to unduly complicate trial of the questions pertaining to the

Howell v. State

136 Fla. 582 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jan 24, 1939

That said information was not filed by the County Solicitor of Hillsborough County, State of Florida, under oath as required by law, for that the s'aid County Solicitor did not personally appear before any person qualified … We hold that this is a question of fact to be established in criminal prosecutions like the one at bar, beyond a reasonable doubt.

Florida Department of Revenue v. American Business USA Corp.

41 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 237 · Supreme Court of Florida · May 26, 2016

The facts establish that American Business had more than a slight presence in Florida. … Thus, the law is established that without any physical presence in Florida, the sales tax imposed on American Business in this case for its out-of-state sales to out-of-state customers would clearly be in violation of the

Louis K. Liggett Co. v. Amos

104 Fla. 609 · Supreme Court of Florida · Apr 4, 1932

Every person, firm, corporation, association or co-partnership opening, establishing, operating or maintaining one or more stores or mercantile establishments within this State, under the same general management, supervision … or ownership, shall pay the license fee hereinafter prescribed for the privilege of opening, establishing, operating or maintaining such stores or mercantile establishments.

Northside Motors of Florida, Inc. v. Brinkley

282 So. 2d 617 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jul 31, 1973

He has no right to use force and enjoys no immunity. He acts at his peril, and exposes himself to severe potential liability, including liability for punitive damages. Buie v. … "This reading of Sniadach and Goldberg reflects the premise that those cases marked a radical departure from established principles of procedural due process. They did not.

State v. McBride

848 So. 2d 287 · Supreme Court of Florida · May 15, 2003

In my view, the reason for the struggle to make well-established legal principles fit into the rule 3.800(a) framework is because neither doctrine is suited to the unique jurisprudential concerns regarding illegal sentences … We recognized *294 that "clearly the class of errors that constitute an `illegal' sentence that can be raised for the first time in a postconviction motion decades after a sentence becomes final is a narrower class of errors