Case law

Tampa Transit Lines, Inc. v. Smith

155 So. 2d 557 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 2, 1963

Does the verdict so clearly exceed any reasonable evaluation of these elements as to shock the conscience? … It would seem that the jury, without being shockingly unreasonable, could have allocated the remainder of the award to these established elements of damages.

State v. Diamond

553 So. 2d 1185 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 28, 1989

In so doing, the panel would run roughshod over clearly established Florida Supreme Court precedent, the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, and the rights of victims. … As a qualified expert, Dr.

Sharick v. Southeastern University of Health Sciences, Inc.

780 So. 2d 136 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 2, 2000

Southeastern's publications at the time of Sharick's enrollment clearly support this conclusion. … The record in this case establishes that but for Sharick's dismissal from the university, he would have obtained his DO degree some two months thereafter.

Fields v. Wilensky

247 So. 2d 477 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 2, 1971

Thus, it was clearly an action to enforce an inchoate statutory civil penalty against an alleged usurious corporate lender and in favor of a corporate borrower. … “The law seems well established that, in such type action, the statutory provision relied upon creates no vested substantive right but only an enforceable penalty.

Hartley v. State

650 So. 2d 1044 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 11, 1995

The creation of the habitual felony offender division in the present case is clearly analogous to the specialized domestic violence division in Garcia . … For example, before a defendant can meet the criteria for the habitual felony offender division, he must have at least three prior qualifying felony convictions.

In Re Forfeiture of $62,200 in US Cur.

531 So. 2d 352 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 11, 1988

SLINGERLAND: I'm attempting to qualify him as an expert in the detection of marijuana by sight or smell. … As the party having the burden of establishing error on appeal, appellant clearly assumed the risk that his efforts in this court to elevate a factual ambiguity to the level of a constitutional defense would be resolved against

Jacqueline Huggins, individually, and with Alexander Huggins, as Mother and Father and Next Friends of A.R.H., a minor child v. Jeffrey Siegel, individually

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 15, 2021

The trial court also found that the expert was not qualified to testify on causation and his testimony was neither reliable nor valid under Daubert. … waited approximately 230 days after deposing Appellants’ expert to challenge the expert’s testimony, but he filed his Daubert motion approximately one month prior to the pretrial conference and within the time limitation established

Schooley v. Judd

149 So. 2d 587 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 30, 1963

Since the 1938 Amendment to Article X, Section 7, it has not been necessary to establish the relationship of the head of a household as a prerequisite to qualify for the exemption, because that requirement was thereby specifically … As pointed out in the majority opinion, the concept of headship embodied in Article X, Sec. 1, of the Constitution of Florida, is not likewise a requisite to be established in order to qualify for the tax exemption in Sec

B.J.M. v. State, Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services

627 So. 2d 512 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 28, 1993

In the present ease, it is undisputed, as the majority recognizes, that HRS was providing services to B.J.M. pursuant to a permanent placement plan established by court order authorized by section 39.452, Florida Statutes … The reading of this section confirms that much broader immunity has been conferred upon HRS, its agents, servants, and employees than is otherwise conferred by the general waiver of immunity contained in section 768.28, Florida

Poleyeff v. City of Miami Beach

818 So. 2d 672 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 12, 2002

On appeal, the City concedes that it is not entitled to sovereign immunity. … This argument is contrary to clearly controlling Florida Supreme Court precedent.

Bolen v. State

943 So. 2d 855 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Nov 8, 2006

The record clearly shows that defense counsel affirmatively represented to the court that there was no objection to the State's representation of Appellant's last release date from the DOC; therefore, neither the State nor … He agreed with the prosecutor's representation that appellant did, in fact, qualify as a prison releasee reoffender. Appellate counsel has not alleged either in the trial court or here that appellant does not qualify.

Debary Real Estate Holdings, LLC v. State, Department of Business & Professional Regulation, Division of Parimutuel Wagering

112 So. 3d 157 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 10, 2013

Courts must defer to an agency’s interpretation of a statute it administers unless the interpretation is clearly erroneous. Natelson v. Dep’t of Ins., 454 So.2d 31, 32 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). … Rather, we are to give effect to the plain language of a statute unless the plain language is so absurd as to be clearly contrary to legislative intent. See State v. Hackley, 95 So.3d 92, 95-96 (Fla.2012).

COUCH CONST. CO., INC. v. Department of Transp.

361 So. 2d 184 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 16, 1978

It is an equally well established principle of law that a court will only consider those issues framed by the pleadings or tried by consent. … Furthermore, it obviously would be advantageous to both the Department and the public not to have this contractor suspended from the qualified bidding list at a time when bids are due to be received on the adjacent paving

Hensley v. Punta Gorda

686 So. 2d 724 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 6, 1997

Nonetheless, in cases such as the present one, the record must clearly indicate the appellant's standing to raise the issue of the unconstitutionality or invalidity of a specific section of the law. Id. … Because Hensley has not established her status as a qualified individual with a disability, she may not seek relief under the employment provisions of the ADA. See, Reiff v.

Lemieux v. Tandem Health Care, Inc.

862 So. 2d 745 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Oct 29, 2003

of a clearly established principle of law resulting in a miscarriage of justice.'") … Nor does the text of the statute clearly establish that the trial court's ruling is subject to correction by way of certiorari.

JPM Inv. Group, Inc. v. Brevard County Bd. of County Commissioners

818 So. 2d 595 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 3, 2002

Clearly the former definition section contemplated that both activities and structure on the zoned land could constitute a non-conforming use. … More restrictive hours are placed on establishments serving all alcoholic beverages as distinguished from establishments selling only beer and wine.

Armstrong v. State

148 So. 3d 124 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 24, 2014

incorporated by the postconviction court, the State asserted that although Armstrong's claim is facially insufficient, it should be denied without leave to amend because he would be unable to amend it in good faith to establish … State, 74 So. 3d 127, 129 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) ("However, the court's advice to Singfield was clearly qualified: the court informed him that in all likelihood, he would be sentenced to sixty- five months in prison, despite

Newman v. State

602 So. 2d 1351 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 27, 1992

The 1972 Constitution established a requirement for Bar membership at the time the county court judge took office, but conferred the power on the Legislature to “otherwise provide[ ] by general law....” Id. … The latter constitutional amendment very clearly authorizes a general law like that set forth in section 34.021.

State v. Holloway

318 So. 2d 421 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 1, 1975

The de facto doctrine is firmly established and recognized in the decisional law of the land. For instance, in the case of Powell v. … To lend judicial approval and protection to such contention is not consistent with decisional law and well-established principles.

State, Department of Revenue Ex Rel. Carnley v. Lynch

53 So. 3d 1154 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Feb 7, 2011

A ruling constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of the law when it amounts to “a violation of a clearly established principle of law resulting in a miscarriage of justice.” Yang Enters., Inc. v. … The term “clearly established law” refers to “recent controlling case law, rules of court, statutes, and constitutional law.” Allstate Ins. Co. v. Kaklamanos, 843 So.2d 885, 890 (Fla.2003).