Case law

Bell v. USB Acquisition Co., Inc.

734 So. 2d 403 · Supreme Court of Florida · May 20, 1999

Ford, 564 So.2d 1078 (Fla.1990). [8] We concluded in Sun Bank that the commercial bank, as the prevailing party, did not automatically qualify to receive a contingency multiplier simply because its attorney provided representation … The multiplier is not automatic and exists and can be used only when its purpose is clearly established in the record.

In Re Adoption of Baby EAW

658 So. 2d 961 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jul 20, 1995

We find that by this language the Legislature clearly did not limit "conduct" to financial support. Conduct generally connotes behavior. … If this was the man who was earning $300.00 to $400.00 a week net which he claimed he was making and using the money to support the natural mother, how could he possibly have qualified for the advice of the Legal Aid Society

Hart v. Bostwick

14 Fla. 162 · Supreme Court of Florida · Apr 15, 1872

This, as it was preceded and qualified by the suggestion that the jury must first find that -the plaintiffs had established their right, should have been . … To impose ■upon the failing - party the payment of a sum of money greater than is necessary to indemnify the prevailing party, would be a punitive judgment, clearly not within the purpose of the law.

Florida Bar

13 Fla. L. Weekly 601 · Supreme Court of Florida · Sep 29, 1988

ESTABLISHMENT AND PROBATE OF LOST OR DESTROYED WILL (a) Petition. … ESTABLISHMENT AND PROBATE OF LOST OR DESTROYED WILL (a) Proceeding. The establishment and probate of a lost or destroyed will shall be in one proceeding. (b) Petition.

In Re Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure

272 So. 2d 65 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jan 29, 1973

The Court may appoint not exceeding three disinterested qualified experts to examine the defendant and to testify at the hearing as to his mental condition. … The Court may appoint not exceeding three disinterested qualified experts to examine the defendant and testify at the hearing as to his mental condition.

Danford v. State

53 Fla. 4 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jan 15, 1907

The judge in his general charge had elaborately and clearly discussed and defined murder in the first and second degrees, and manslaughter. … We do not think the facts of this case require us to qualify this doctrine. Mr. Danford testified “both the boys were facing me when I shot. I told my daughter to get out of the way.

Michael A. Gordon v. State of Florida

Supreme Court of Florida · Sep 1, 2022

A trial court’s decision will only be reversed if it is clearly erroneous. Rimmer v. … But this argument ultimately fails because it rests on a misunderstanding of what constitutes and what establishes premeditation.

State v. Matera

266 So. 2d 661 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jul 12, 1972

"The very papers submitted by Pheribo clearly indicate that Lovejoy was thoroughly cross-examined at the trial, and his possible bias, prejudice or motive for testifying — stemming from expectations of leniency in sentencing … Accordingly, the question certified is answered in the negative, as qualified by the foregoing authorities. Credibility of a witness is not, in itself, a basis for post-conviction relief.

GULFSTREAM PARK RACING v. Tampa Bay Downs

948 So. 2d 599 · Supreme Court of Florida · Sep 21, 2006

Currently, there are only four thoroughbred racetracks in Florida that qualify to receive these simulcast signals directly from out-of-state thoroughbred tracks. … While an out-of-state facility may establish the terms of receipt of a simulcast signal by an in-state facility in accordance with the IHA, that facility may not require that the signal be redistributed in Florida in a manner

Alachua County v. Powers

351 So. 2d 32 · Supreme Court of Florida · Oct 6, 1977

The board contends that the language of certain statutes clearly contemplates that the county commission shall have care and control over funds on deposit in various banks. … Section 145.022, Florida Statutes (1975), provides the method by which the guaranteed salary may be established.

In Re Amendments to Fla. Rules of Juv. Pro.

649 So. 2d 1370 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jan 26, 1995

adjudicatory hearing or a hearing to determine the mental condition of the child, the court may on its own motion, and shall on motion of the state or the child, appoint not exceedingno more than 3, nor fewer than 2, disinterested qualified … consent for and to obtain ordinary and necessary medical and dental treatment and examination for the above child(ren), including blood testing deemed medically appropriate, and necessary preventative care, including ordinary immunizations

Dept. of Revenue v. First Union Nat. Bk.

12 Fla. L. Weekly 489 · Supreme Court of Florida · Sep 24, 1987

Our cases establish, however, that if the "tax remains the same whatever the character of the [property] may be, no claim can be *119 sustained that this taxing statute discriminates against the federal obligations." 459 … We hold that the Florida franchise tax on banks and savings associations is nondiscriminatory and, therefore, qualifies as an exception to the exemption as set forth in 31 U.S.C. § 3124 .

Conley v. Boyle Drug Co.

570 So. 2d 275 · Supreme Court of Florida · Nov 1, 1990

Smith, 176 So.2d 903 (Fla. 1965) (plaintiff seeking to effect service under section 47.16, Florida Statutes, has burden of presenting a situation which clearly justifies application of that section). … The affidavit further stated that Ortho is not now and never has been qualified to transact business in the State of Florida; that it has never been domiciled in the state; that it does not have nor ever has it had a telephone

Elledge v. State

911 So. 2d 57 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jun 9, 2005

The great weight of expert testimony clearly cut against Dr. Lewis's testimony and made it less persuasive. Elledge v. Dugger, 823 F.2d at 1447 & n. 18. Dr. … Elledge also claims that this ineffectiveness violated the rule established in Ake v.

Ramirez v. State

739 So. 2d 568 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jul 8, 1999

"Fairness is clearly the focus of this rule." Jordan v. State, 694 So.2d 708, 712 (Fla.1997). … In the instant case, the officers clearly ignored the explicit provisions of this law.

Miller v. State

35 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 323 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jun 3, 2010

However, there is no requirement that a court find a juror qualified if he “might vote for death under certain personal standards.” Witt, 469 U.S. at 422 , 105 S.Ct. 844 . … In conclusion, Miller has not established any basis on which this Court should reconsider the established points of law with regard to Florida’s capital sentencing scheme. Accordingly, we deny relief on this issue.

Shellito v. State

121 So. 3d 445 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jul 3, 2013

Sarkis opined that Shellito qualified as having severe mental or emotional disturbance. … Accordingly, Shellito has failed to establish a Brady violation.

Elliott v. State

77 Fla. 611 · Supreme Court of Florida · May 12, 1919

right of a person to a fair and impartial trial that it has been held that in a prosecution for stealing a dollar’s worth of electricity from an electric company a motorman on one of the company’s street cars was not a qualified … This testimony was irrelevant and immaterial, but as the evidence clearly establishes the guilt of the defendant Elliott, and even without this testimony, we fail to see how the jury could have done aught but find him guilty

Town of Palm Beach v. City of West Palm Beach

55 So. 2d 566 · Supreme Court of Florida · Dec 11, 1951

Section 14 of the Act requires the County Commissioners to provide for the holding of a referendum election with the proviso that the Act shall not become effective unless it is approved by the qualified electors in each … It was clearly the legislative intent and mandate that the taxes to be levied should be levied by the respective municipalities, and that the rate of taxation in each municipality should be uniform.

City of Clearwater v. Acker

755 So. 2d 597 · Supreme Court of Florida · Dec 9, 1999

Clearly, the stated purpose for the enactment of section 440.15(1)(e)1, as a hedge against inflation, would be frustrated under the City's interpretation of section 440.20(15). [4] Thus, there is an apparent conflict between … though he had settled his worker's compensation claim with a lump-sum payment. [4] Moreover, recipients of periodic payments, especially those who are receiving 100 percent of their individual AWW and who could otherwise qualify