Case law

Morrison v. Thoelke

155 So. 2d 889 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 30, 1963

Yet the latter is obviously qualified in the "deposited acceptance" rule and in many instances of unilateral contract. Why then should the "loss of control" principle not also be — or have been — qualified? … At this point and upon the "overt act" theory issue is clearly joined.

DEREK WARREN LOGUE v. LAUREN FRANCES BOOK

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 24, 2020

Clearly, Respondent seeks to bring about political and social policy change. It is immaterial whether he enjoys significant public support for his positions. … In short, competent substantial evidence established the respondent’s posts would cause substantial emotional distress to a reasonable person—and did so in this case to the petitioner.

Leonard v. Susco Car Rental System of Florida

103 So. 2d 243 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 5, 1958

Beginning with these latter cases another era began and the bailor-owner of an automobile for hire lost his immunity * * *." … Implied consent, as well as express consent, will support such liability when the circumstances clearly and fairly permit such implication.

Hospital Corp. of Lake Worth v. Romaguera

11 Fla. L. Weekly 1998 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 9, 1987

What we do quarrel with is that which smacks of two sets of books, one to present to the Joint Commission on Accreditation to establish that the physician does retain his staff privileges and the other to present to the luckless … As to the first of these criteria, Florida case law clearly holds that the question of whether or not an interference is justified is normally a jury question.

Joint Ventures, Inc. v. Dept. of Transp.

13 Fla. L. Weekly 289 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 29, 1988

Basic constitutional considerations clearly provide an adequate course of relief for the alleged infringement on appellant's property. … The form of the remedy did not qualify the right. It rested upon the Fifth Amendment. Statutory recognition was not necessary. A promise to pay was not necessary.

Wright & Seaton, Inc. v. Prescott

420 So. 2d 623 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 15, 1982

Appellee then went to work for the new agency appellant's former employee had established in West Palm Beach. … Appellee clearly could have brought an action against appellant based on the agreement if appellant had failed to pay him for his services.

Seminole County v. City of Winter Springs

935 So. 2d 521 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 26, 2006

However, the "Rural Area" approved by the County's electorate clearly includes the Rook property. … County's charter, the initiative process is started by a petition signed by electors "residing in at least 3/5 of the County Commission election districts and the County as a whole equal to five percent (5%) of the electors qualified

Publix Super Markets, Inc. v. McGuire

629 So. 2d 862 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Oct 12, 1993

Naman establish within a reasonable degree of medical probability, the cause of the coronary artery spasm. … If the ailment was clearly caused by the work event, then Victor Wine should not be applicable.

Gerard Baldie v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 17, 2025

It doesn’t seem to establish any sort of pattern of this type of criminal conduct such that it would prevent the Court finding[] an isolated incident. … “Neither the legislature nor the courts have established a bright-line rule for determining whether an offense is an isolated incident.” State v.

Blackburn v. Ippolito

156 So. 2d 550 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 11, 1963

Lotteries are clearly illegal in Florida, but legislatures generally, ours among them, have been reluctant to define the term "lottery." … In that case all that was necessary to qualify to win a prize was to go into any Knox service station or store and obtain a ticket, leave the stub in a container and where the express purpose of the enterprise was the creation

Save the Homosassa River Alliance, Inc. v. Citrus County

2 So. 3d 329 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Oct 24, 2008

But a mere “interest in a problem,” no matter how longstanding *344 the interest and no matter how qualified the organization is in evaluating the problem, is not sufficient by itself to render the organization “adversely … As discussed above, Florida case law clearly requires more concrete injury than that alleged by the Plaintiffs. On this point the U.S.

State ex rel. Ashby v. Haddock

140 So. 2d 631 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 17, 1962

On a later date the relators, as the qualified executors under the probated documents, filed in the court of probate a ■“Sworn Statement for Notice of Probate” under Section 732.28, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., the pertinent … The respondent judge clearly acted within the scope of jurisdiction of the court over which he presided in entering the order denying re-lators’ motion to dismiss the trustees’ petition for revocation.

First Union v. Goodwin Beach Partnership

644 So. 2d 1361 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 16, 1994

The trial court clearly misconstrued Horne , which involved two separate actions. … Mike Roy, a qualified real estate appraiser, testified for First Union that the fair market value was $2,180,000.00.

DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. v. Waxman

95 So. 3d 928 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 3, 2012

These provisions clearly assigned to DePuy the right to enforce the non-compete covenants. Thus, as noted, all rights in the ongoing business were explicitly assigned to DePuy. … Valuable confidential business or professional information that otherwise does not qualify as trade secrets. 3. Substantial relationships with specific prospective or existing customers, patients, or clients. 4.

Daniel Varone v. Publix Super Markets, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 18, 2026

Foreseeability clearly is crucial in defining the scope of the general duty placed on every person to avoid negligent acts or omissions. … The principles discussed above are all well-established.

Dean v. Dean

607 So. 2d 494 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Nov 4, 1992

And even if it were, the engagement of an attorney to effect the return of stolen property should certainly qualify. … In my view, the evidence in this case clearly shows that the unnamed party intended for the attorney to act merely as an agent or conduit for the delivery of property which was completely unrelated to legal representation

Livingston v. State

219 So. 3d 911 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 31, 2017

Such error must be clearly demonstrated by the appellant.”). … The foundation may be laid by testimony establishing all three requirements. See id.

Megiel-Rollo v. Megiel

162 So. 3d 1088 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 17, 2015

Nevertheless, the Trust clearly designated the Decedent as a beneficiary of the Trust during her lifetime. … It is beyond argument that the statutory reference to "a mistake of fact or law" is not limited by any qualifiers.

Parson v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 2, 2025

State, 35 So. 3d 47, 48 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (“It is well established that a plea agreement is a contract.”). … The court warned about this in Simons, but the majority disregards this warning in violation of established contract principles.

Goines v. State

708 So. 2d 656 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 8, 1998

Defendant admitted at the rule 3.850 hearing that the original trial judge did not sentence him to the 30-year, maximum HFO sentence requested by the state, and conceded that he then qualified for HFO sentencing. … The state had clearly stated its intention to seek HFO sentencing if a conviction resulted, and it is obvious that in deciding whether to impose a HFO sentence for the current offense *660 the sentencing judge would be considering