Case law

Seminole County v. Chandrinos

816 So. 2d 1241 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 31, 2002

That clearly is not the case here. The fees to which Zook and Morris are entitled are not dependent under the contract on the outcome of the case. … Owners are entitled to expert witness fees, which go to the establishment of just compensation. Dade County v. Brigham, 47 So.2d 602 (Fla. 1950).

CITY OF OPA-LOCKA, FLORIDA, etc. v. GEORGE SUAREZ

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 13, 2021

It governs the parties’ rights and obligations and establishes the limits of the City’s waiver of sovereign immunity as to water deposits. … The language of the deposit slip agreement clearly indicates that the City may use the deposit funds as if the City “were the absolute owner thereof,” until a customer discontinues City water services.

Larman v. State

724 So. 2d 1230 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 8, 1999

Larman first argues that the trial court erred in instructing the jury on the crime of conspiracy. [2] He asserts that the instruction should not have been issued because conspiracy does not qualify as a predicate offense … At the same time, the trial evidence clearly established Mr.

Hull v. BD OF COM'RS OF HALIFAX HOSP.

453 So. 2d 519 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 2, 1984

Clearly then, the bylaw has been applied equally to the doctors of osteopathy and medical doctors and the bylaw is not violative of Section 395.0653(1), Florida Statutes. … Clearly, there is no provision in the statute requiring such a determination to be made in deciding what criteria to impose for staff membership.

Amanda Pope and Anastasia, Inc. v. Daniel and Donna Grace

151 So. 3d 523 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Nov 5, 2014

Counsel for DEP, however, advised them the repair work may qualify for an exemption. … Indeed, the proposed activity in this case could qualify for an exemption under either provision if the activity meets the requirements of each exemption.”

In the Interest Of: F.J.G.M.

196 So. 3d 534 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 20, 2016

In fact, the evidence establishes the opposite. … CONCLUSION The allegations, and supporting affidavit in this case failed to establish abandonment as defined in section 39.01(1).

Wainwright v. State Dept. of Transp.

11 Fla. L. Weekly 938 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 22, 1986

The revocations were initiated, according to DOT, to "establish control over outdoor advertising in the third district or face losing federal highway funds." … We find that this contention misreads the plain language of the authorizing statute, which clearly requires an affirmative violation of the statute by the permittee.

Karma Thornton and Connie Thornton v. American Family Life Assurance Company etc.

225 So. 3d 1012 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 13, 2017

At the time the policy was issued, I.R.C. § 152(a)(1) defined “dependent” to be a “qualifying child.” “Qualifying child” was in turn defined in section 152(c)(1) as: (c) Qualifying child. … Ruderman, 117 So. 3d 943, 951 (Fla. 2013) (explaining insurance company has duty to limit liability under policy “clearly and unambiguously”).

Seibels Bruce Ins. Companies v. Deville Condo. Ass'n, Inc.

786 So. 2d 616 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 26, 2001

Surely, this orphaning of the "child of Congress" to 50 state court jurisdictions was not the intention of Congress in establishing "a pervasive and comprehensive scheme of federal regulations setting forth the rights and … The inclusion of the explicit language restricting jurisdiction to the district court, without any qualifying statements, demonstrates Congress' intent to restrict jurisdiction. IV.

J.B. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 5, 2018

We additionally conclude that, even if the more permissive or qualified test relied upon by the Fourth District was applied to the instant case, the trial court’s order would still constitute a clear departure from established … Nothing in the case law suggests that the death penalty implication immunizes Barahona from making the requisite showing of relevance, the applicability of an exception, and/or the existence of a waiver.

Estate of Willis v. Gaffney

677 So. 2d 949 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 31, 1996

The trial court determined, in that regard, that the appellees had established that their signatures on the deed had been forged. … sufficient to "qualify as a timely filed motion to vacate judgment under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b)(3)."

Laura Rosich-Medina v. Christian Cerqueda Chilaud

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 3, 2025

A departure from the essential requirements of law occurs “when there has been a violation of a clearly established principle of law resulting in a miscarriage of justice.” Nader, 87 So. 3d at 722 (quoting Combs v. … Clearly established law “can derive from a variety of legal sources, including recent controlling case law, 5 rules of court, statutes, and constitutional law.” Allstate Ins.

Thomas v. Smith

882 So. 2d 1037 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 13, 2004

It appears that the Taxpayers are otherwise fully qualified for a homestead exemption. … Taxpayers who otherwise qualify for the homestead exemption shall be granted an exemption only "upon establishment of right thereto in the manner prescribed by law." Art. VII, § 6(a), Fla. Const.

Lester v. State

76 So. 3d 952 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 28, 2011

The Court does believe that this is a dying declaration and does qualify under the evidence code and therefore I’m going [sic] grant the State’s motion to admit the evidence. … is a mixed question of law and fact that is reviewed under a ‘clearly erroneous’ standard.”

Agrico Chemical Co. v. Tucker

12 Fla. L. Weekly 1909 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 7, 1987

However, the court appears to qualify its holding with respect to modifications based on a change in condition: It appears to us that the rule might vary when modification is allowed because of a change in conditions ... … Therefore, the modification was clearly sought and granted based on a change in condition since the first impairment was established.

Cenvill Communities, Inc. v. Brown

409 So. 2d 1147 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Feb 11, 1982

Where rehabilitation is involved, the date of maximum medical improvement is artifically established by statute after the rehabilitation program has been completed. … The carrier argues that a claimant does not qualify for rehabilitation program benefits until such time as he commences the classroom program.

Hutchins v. Strickland

674 So. 2d 870 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 29, 1996

location, and extent of his occupation must be definitely and clearly established by affirmative proof.” … This they failed to do because the location of the fence and a description of the sliver of disputed land was never proven. • A qualified surveyor was called as a witness by the Hutchinses.

Endress v. State

10 Fla. L. Weekly 293 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 30, 1985

Miller, an associate Hillsborough County Medical Examiner, was called and qualified as a medical expert to establish the cause of death of the victim. … While there are cases which fall on both sides of the issue of suppression under somewhat similar circumstances, we feel that the circumstances of this case clearly support the trial court's refusal to suppress.

BD. OF TRUSTEES OF CITY OF MIAMI FIRE FIGHTERS'& POLICE OFF. RET. TRUST v. Fernandez

675 So. 2d 638 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 5, 1996

We agree that this case clearly qualifies as a "judicial proceeding ... brought under or pursuant to the provisions of this chapter." … NOTES [1] "The City of Miami Fire Fighters' and Police Officers' Retirement Trust Board, at their meeting of September 16, 1994, moved to deny your request for disability retirement as it was not established that your disability

Stroemel v. Columbia County

930 So. 2d 742 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 4, 2006

Appellant purchased this property for the purpose of establishing a single family dwelling, as well as a rustic canoe and kayak rental operation. … Are customarily accessory and clearly incidental and subordinate to permitted or permissible uses and structures; b.