Case law

Paramore v. State

229 So. 2d 855 · Supreme Court of Florida · Sep 10, 1969

Another ground asserted by appellant for excluding the video tape confession is the failure of the State to establish a continuity of possession of the "easily alterable tape." … It is extremely difficult to definitely state at what point the line should be drawn between what is doubtfully permissible argument and what is clearly wrong.

Schreiber v. Rowe

814 So. 2d 396 · Supreme Court of Florida · Mar 21, 2002

Governments, both state and federal, quite properly spend vast sums of money to establish machinery to try defendants accused of crime. … The public defender shall be elected at the general election by the qualified electors of their respective judicial circuits as other state officials are elected and shall serve for a term of four years. § 27.50, Fla.

Houghtaling v. Seminole Tribe of Florida

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 44 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jan 7, 1993

suit under these circumstances because the record does not establish an explicit and unequivocal waiver of immunity under existing federal law and statutes. … Clearly, the sovereign immunity of Indian tribes is "subject to the superior and plenary control of Congress" and cannot be waived absent the express consent of Congress.

OFFICE OF STATE ATTY. v. Parrotino

628 So. 2d 1097 · Supreme Court of Florida · Dec 2, 1993

The immunity clearly applies in this case. We are very mindful of the facts at hand. … However, we cannot allow sympathy in one instance to establish precedent that would overturn a well founded and long-standing immunity accorded to state attorneys.

Hill v. Dept. of Corrections

12 Fla. L. Weekly 495 · Supreme Court of Florida · Sep 24, 1987

App. 1 , 371 N.W.2d 876 (1985), stated: Clearly, the sovereign immunity of the states was well established at common law at the time that § 1983 was enacted. … In any event, that dimension of state sovereign immunity clearly preexisted Section 1983 of the federal Civil Rights Act.

Commercial Carrier Corp. v. Indian River Cty.

371 So. 2d 1010 · Supreme Court of Florida · Apr 19, 1979

The state of the law concerning municipal sovereign immunity on the date of enactment of section 768.28 was clearly enunciated in Gordon v. … For a time, the lower appellate courts in California labored unsuccessfully *1021 to develop a dictionary definition of "discretion" which established liability for minor discretionary actions but preserved immunity for high-level

West Florida Regional Medical Center, Inc. v. See

37 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 22 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jan 12, 2012

The federal court held that although the HCQIA provided “qualified immunity from suit to officials who conduct peer reviews that meet the standards outlined in the statute,” it concluded that the HCQIA did not establish a … The HCQIA clearly does not provide for confidentiality for peer review documents.

Everton v. Willard

10 Fla. L. Weekly 201 · Supreme Court of Florida · Apr 4, 1985

They are clearly not ministerial acts as contemplated by the Huhn decision or the dissents. Our decision in this case is consistent with our holding in Wong v. … No other courts may be established by the state, any political subdivision or any municipality... .

State Ex Rel. Weber v. Register

67 So. 2d 619 · Supreme Court of Florida · Oct 13, 1953

Driver demonstrate clearly that the purchase of the property and the subsequent listing of the same for sale amounted to engaging in a "business venture" as contemplated by our statute. … Doherty, a nonresident, established an office in Iowa and carried on his business of dealing in stocks.

Jones v. Florida Ins. Guar. Ass'n, Inc.

908 So. 2d 435 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jul 7, 2005

Thus, this record conclusively established that Dealers clearly had the duty to defend Michael Pratt. … The court below clearly erroneously applied existing law concerning FIGA's immunity from bad faith claims into the present non bad faith simple coverage context.

Bonvento v. BD. OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, PALM BEACH CTY.

194 So. 2d 605 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jan 25, 1967

If the State had waived its immunity by general law as provided by Section 22 of the Constitution, recovery in a tort action would be dependent upon establishing *609 legal liability and proving damages. … Established principles of equal protection of the laws, it seems to me, would be violated by such a concept. What actually occurs under such a situation is clearly revealed by an examination of the 1965 general acts.

Eric Green v. Calvin Cottrell

41 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 506 · Supreme Court of Florida · Nov 10, 2016

The limited waiver of sovereign immunity for tort actions is provided in section 768.28: (1) In accordance with s. 13, Art. … However, were that the case, there would be no need to qualify prisoner actions with the language “relating to the conditions of ... confinement.”

McGhee v. Volusia County

679 So. 2d 729 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jul 3, 1996

The employing agency is immune as a matter of law only if the acts are so extreme as to constitute a clearly unlawful usurpation of authority the deputy does not rightfully possess, Swenson, or if there is not even a pretense … The majority relies on the pre-sovereign-immunity case of Swenson v.

Lee v. DHRS

698 So. 2d 1194 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jun 19, 1997

Essentially, she has attempted to establish this breach of duty in two ways. … The record clearly establishes that the claimant was arguing against the interpretation and implementation of rules governing the supervision of patients and the normalization policy, which are immune discretionary policy-level

Westlake v. Merritt

85 Fla. 28 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jan 10, 1923

If Chapter 7821, Acts of 1919, be valid, its provisions for the creation and establishment of a “State Board of Chiropractic Examiners,” would create State offices. See State ex rel. Clyatt v. … the statute affected only one of three election commissioners, if they may be considered officers, and the organic provision violated forbad the granting by the legislature of “any special or exclusive right, privilege or immunity

Younger v. Giller Contracting Co., Inc.

143 Fla. 335 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jun 7, 1940

It clearly appears from the plaintiff’s declaration that the plaintiff’s only legal right in proceeding is for compensation under the Florida Workmen’s Compensation Act.” … Plaintiff contends, and he is supported by authority, that inasmuch as the obligation of securing equal benefits is imposed upon the general contractor, he is immunized from common-law liability to employees injured in work

Shevin v. Sunbeam Television Corp.

351 So. 2d 723 · Supreme Court of Florida · Oct 28, 1977

Further, it is in the interest of the broadcaster or publisher that it be able to establish the truth with precision. … One witness testified this his experience with 1600 interviews clearly illustrated that the truth could only be gained from private one-to-one interviews.

Searcy, Denney, Scarola, Barnhart & Shipley, etc. v. State of Florida

42 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 92 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jan 31, 2017

“[T]he statute’s plain and ordinary meaning must control, unless this leads to an unreasonable result or a result clearly contrary to legislative intent.” Daniels v. Fla. … Similarly, in this case, we are loathe to strike the entire claims bill, which is clearly intended to provide critical compensation for Aaron’s injuries in this case.

Department of Rev. v. Amrep Corp.

358 So. 2d 1343 · Supreme Court of Florida · May 25, 1978

The court may render declaratory judgments on the existence, or nonexistence: (1) Of any immunity, power, privilege or right; or (2) Of any fact upon which the existence or nonexistence of such immunity, power, privilege … or right does or may depend, whether such immunity, power, privilege or right now exists or will arise in the future.

In re Amendments to the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar—Florida Registered Paralegal Program

32 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 712 · Supreme Court of Florida · Nov 15, 2007

Rule 20-3.1, the only rule under subchapter 20-3, establishes three alternative ways to qualify as a Florida Registered Paralegal (FRP): (1) by having the prescribed education and experience; (2) by having the prescribed … SUBCHAPTER 20-9 IMMUNITY. There is only one rule in this subchapter.