Case law

John Deere Indus. Equipment Co. v. Roberts

362 So. 2d 65 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 9, 1978

The Roberts additionally argue that even if the true identity of the insured debtor had not been established by Deere's pleadings and by Gunter, the entity, C. & G. … The contract clearly provides that when the note is signed by only one debtor, such debtor is the eligible debtor. Chuck Roberts was the only person who signed the contract on behalf of C. & G. Construction Company.

BARBARA NAMON, etc. v. KAREN NAMON ELDER

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Nov 24, 2021

Because such an injunction is properly entered only under extraordinary circumstances, “[t]he party appealing the denial . . . carries a heavy burden to demonstrate that the court’s ruling was clearly improper.” … In this regard, the statute creates “a self-executing, absolute immunity to claims,” and it is not subject to extension or waiver. May v. Ill. Nat’l Ins. Co., 771 So. 2d 1143, 1156 (Fla. 2000).

Nelson v. State

811 So. 2d 761 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 6, 2002

contemplates that in some qualifying cases prosecutors will use their discretion not to seek enhanced penalties under the statute. … [W]here a sentence is one that has been established by the legislature and is not on its face cruel and unusual, it will be sustained when attacked on grounds of due process, equal protection, or separation of power theories

Lassiter v. Resolution Trust Corp.

610 So. 2d 531 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 4, 1992

Under this standard, the borrower must be able to point to documents that clearly manifest the bilateral nature of the parties' rights and obligations. Id. … In the cases cited by the RTC, the agreements relied upon by the borrowers were not found in the bank's records nor did they clearly establish the bank's obligations. See Baumann v.

Estate of Arroyo v. Infinity Indemnity Insurance Co.

211 So. 3d 240 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 18, 2017

It is axiomatic that a Coblentz agreement establishes the insured’s liability. Mid-Continent Cas. … As the Court clearly explained in its footnote following these findings, its holding was limited to actions brought in probate court against the estate: As with section 733.702, we determine that an estate may waive the time

Florida Bd. of Med. v. Florida Academy of Cosmetic Surgery, Inc.

808 So. 2d 243 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 23, 2002

Section 458.331(1)(v) clearly gives broad, unqualified, rulemaking authority to the Board to establish "standards of practice and standards of care for particular practice settings." … The findings do not establish that the Board "create[d] unreasonably restrictive and extraordinary standards that deter qualified persons from" becoming CRNA's; "create[d] or maintain[ed] an economic condition that unreasonably

Buono v. City of Riviera Beach

11 Fla. L. Weekly 454 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Feb 18, 1986

In seeking a lump-sum advance, claimant has the burden of persuading the deputy commissioner that the advance is in his best interest, usually by introducing, through a qualified expert witness, evidence of a financial plan … of compensation, other than for medical expenses, shall be allowed only under special circumstances, as when the claimant can demonstrate that lump sum payments will definitely aid in his rehabilitation or are otherwise clearly

Village of Key Biscayne v. Dade County

627 So. 2d 1180 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Nov 9, 1993

Where the words used in an act clearly express the legislative intent no other rules of construction or interpretation are necessary or warranted. Rinker Materials Corp., 286 So.2d at 554 . … The record does not establish that the Project conforms strictly to the CDMP’s requirements.

PROGRESSIVE SELECT INSURANCE CO. v. S H L ENTERPRISES, L L C, A/ A/ O

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Oct 31, 2018

As a result, the circuit court in Lloyd's of Shelton concluded that the county court's order did not depart from a clearly established principle of law. … on the issue did not mean that the county court's order did not depart from a clearly established principle of law.

Computer Sales Intern. v. State Dept. Rev.

656 So. 2d 1382 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 13, 1995

In Lincoln Pointe, the taxpayer had recorded two mortgages in the amounts of $23,800,000 and $5,950,000, respectively, with each containing the qualifying language, "`or so much thereof as may be advanced, to be paid in accordance … Under these conditions, the lease did not establish a fixed and absolute obligation to pay at the moment of execution and cannot be subject to tax.

AA v. State

605 So. 2d 106 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 13, 1992

Obviously, the power to make laws has been delegated to the legislature under article III, section 1 of our constitution, and the legislature has clearly set forth a legislative policy criminalizing escapes. … heap composed of other discarded or ignored judicial doctrines, e.g., privity between consumer and manufacturer as a prerequisite to legal action, contributory negligence as a bar to legal action, caveat lessee, sovereign immunity

5F, LLC v. Dresing

142 So. 3d 936 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 16, 2014

In short, there is extensive - 11 - supreme court authority establishing the riparian right to "wharf out," at least to the low water line, subject only to the public trust … Quite clearly, a dominant estate holder cannot obtain rights that the servient estate holder does not possess.

Alvarez v. State

147 So. 3d 537 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 22, 2014

We don’t want his opinion on — he hasn’t been *541 qualified as an expert on identification or anything. And we don’t want him to give any opinions about what any of the evidence means. … However, that evidence was introduced through a hearsay witness. 7 Aside from the detective’s testimony, there was no evidence clearly reflecting the skin color of both the perpetrators.

Johnson v. Great Expressions Dental Centers of Florida, P.A.

132 So. 3d 1174 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 8, 2014

class; (2) was qualified to do the job; (3) was subjected to an adverse employment action; and (4) the employer treated similarly situated employees outside the class more favorably. … More importantly, we need not decide whether to adopt the “convincing mosaic” test because Johnson clearly fails under the “convincing mosaic” standard as well as the traditional McDonnell Douglas framework.

Bystrom v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States

416 So. 2d 1133 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 31, 1982

A situation might be presented for judicial interference where specific assessment is so obviously and flagrantly excessive as to impute clearly to the assessor an intention to discriminate arbitrarily against the taxpayer … about because of any presumptive correctness in the Board’s determination, but rather because here the appraiser has now accepted the Board’s determination, and, in other cases, because the Board’s determination may be immune

Padron v. State, Department of Environmental Protection

143 So. 3d 1037 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 23, 2014

To qualify for this exemption, any such structure: 1. Shall be used for recreational, non-commercial activities; 2. … Second, regardless of the applicable standard—“impede navigation” or “navigational hazard”—as the ALJ recognized, the Rosenblum case is “clearly distinguishable.”

Maldonado v. EMSA Ltd. Partnership

645 So. 2d 86 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Nov 9, 1994

It does not require that claimant establish defendant's negligence or prove its case during the presuit screening process. … Clearly, if defendant did not have sufficient information to evaluate the merits of the claim it would have been unable to provide a responding affidavit.

Promontory Enterprises, Inc. v. SOUTHERN ENGIN. & CONTRACT., INC.

864 So. 2d 479 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 2, 2004

For example, the 2003 version of the statute provides that "[a] business organization is unlicensed if the business organization does not have a primary or secondary qualifying agent in accordance with this part concerning … Specifically, the facts below established that Southern was unlicensed because it did not have a certificate of authority.

MICHAEL D. JONES v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 26, 2021

[The 7 declarants’] statements clearly were not made before they had time to contrive or misrepresent. … To establish this prong, the State had to either (1) prove that the statements were made without time for reflective thought, or (2) if there was enough time to permit reflective thought, establish that the victim did not

Peninsular Life Insurance Company v. Hanratty

281 So. 2d 609 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 20, 1973

This was clearly an issue for the jury to decide and upon which the jury verdict may have been based. … The right to such a fee is not now established since it is contingent "[u]pon the rendition of a judgment ... against an insurer ...".