Case law

Ennis v. Warm Mineral Springs, Inc.

203 So. 2d 514 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Oct 27, 1967

Dekle, 1910, 60 Fla. 56 , 53 So. 441 : "[e]very fact essential to an estoppel in pais must be clearly and satisfactorily proved". … Daley certainly qualified.

Fabal v. FLORIDA KEYS MEMORIAL HOSP.

452 So. 2d 946 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 29, 1984

, render unnecessary such a forced distinction in order to preserve the constitutionality of the Medical Malpractice Reform Act's joinder provision. [5] Second, the similarities between the Fund and an insurance program clearly … The relationship between the hospital and the Fund, whereby the Fund agrees to provide "coverage" to the hospital to the extent that a malpractice claim against the hospital exceeds $100,000, does not remotely qualify as

Burgess v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 6, 2016

See, e.g., § 322.34(1) (establishing violation for driving by "any person whose driver's license or driving privilege has been cancelled, suspended, or revoked"), (2) (establishing criminal offenses against "[a]ny person … See Webster's Third New Int'l Dictionary of the English Language (1966) (defining privilege, inter alia, as "a right or immunity granted a particular benefit, advantage, or favor" and "a condition of legal nonrestraint of

Lee County v. Brown

929 So. 2d 1202 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 9, 2006

Lee County also asserts that the contract clause is not applicable when the government establishes regulations pursuant to its police powers. … Strong, 300 So.2d 881 (Fla.1974), the contract clause is not applicable when the government establishes regulations pursuant to its police powers.

State of Florida v. Anthony Hunter

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 15, 2026

Because those “related transactions” involved two Florida circuits other than the Seventeenth Circuit, the state argues the offense qualified for SWGJ jurisdiction. … Additionally, in Runcie, we rejected the state’s contention that phone calls established SWGJ jurisdiction. Id. at 1077.

Hernandez v. State

31 So. 3d 873 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 17, 2010

(5), Florida Statutes (2008), provides an exception to the hearsay rule when a witness cannot recall matters of which he or she previously had knowledge. 2 If the proper foundation is laid, a tape-recorded statement may qualify … If the witness’s testimony is useful to establish any fact of consequence significant in the contest of the litigation, the witness may be impeached by means of a prior inconsistent statement as to any other matter testified

State Ex Rel. Dept. of General Serv. v. Willis

344 So. 2d 580 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 29, 1977

mature into a rule or order concerning which the Act assures respondents an opportunity to be heard according to 120.57(1) or (2) procedures and, if the result is adverse, judicial review: "[W]ith only a few exceptions clearly … Establish a single, simple form of proceeding for all review of administrative action. Call it `petition for review.' Get rid of extraordinary remedies as a means of review.

Snyder v. BOARD OF COUNTY COM'RS

595 So. 2d 65 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 12, 1991

ordinance provisions come to be concretely applied to particular premises, ... or to particular conditions, or to be considered in connection with specific complaints, some of them, or even many of them, may be found to be clearly … from tort liability and negligence during the executions or applications of the planning level decisions for which it does not have sovereign immunity.

In Re Dad II

903 So. 2d 1034 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 17, 2005

The M.S. court held: "Notwithstanding that the children may not have seen the shooting, the murder of their mother figure in their home and while they were present in the house certainly qualifies as egregious conduct that … Instead, the trial court made a finding of generalized harm: "Clearly, the [F]ather's extreme violence and callous disregard for the lives of others poses a significant danger to the life, safety, [and] mental and emotional

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Siergiej

116 So. 3d 523 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 14, 2013

Siergiej contends that State Farm was not entitled to a credit because it did not establish that the damages awarded by the jury for lost wages and past and future medical expenses duplicated those benefits. … State Farm is clearly entitled to credit for the $50,000 Mr. Siergiej received from the Sheriff. In the trial court, Mr.

SCOTT ALEXANDER JOHNSTONE v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 17, 2020

The evidence clearly supports the trial court’s finding that Appellant willfully engaged in “a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time” (here, a period of nearly three years), which “evidence … The evidence presented at the hearing was insufficient to establish that any acts, or series of temporally related acts, could combine with others to constitute stalking. In Butler v.

Brigham v. Brigham

11 So. 3d 374 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Feb 25, 2009

A review of the Deed for the EFP Trust (the “EFP Trust Deed”) from Marion to Dana, as trustee to the EFP Trust, shows that it failed to qualify as a “recorded instrument” to create a Florida Land Trust under section 689.071 … Turning now to Patricia, the record clearly shows that she acted as a fiduciary for Marion and as Dana’s de-facto trustee conducting all of the tasks either at the direction of Dana or on her own accord.

Hazen v. Allstate Ins. Co.

952 So. 2d 531 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 17, 2007

Because I conclude that Florida's nonjoinder statute cannot reasonably be interpreted as establishing such a rule, I dissent. … The term settlement has a well-established and unequivocal meaning.

Huck v. State

881 So. 2d 1137 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 16, 2004

Second, the court must determine whether the witness is adequately qualified to express an opinion on the matter. Id. … The case before us is clearly distinguishable.

Barry Cook Ford, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.

616 So. 2d 512 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 18, 1993

If "person" were limited only to those named in paragraph F, there would have been no need for the qualifying language attached to the term "persons" in the phrase "... or disagreement between or among any persons named in … Sections 320.60 through 320.70, Florida Statutes (1987), establish regulations for automobile manufacturers, importers, distributors, and dealers.

Norman v. Gloria Farms, Inc.

668 So. 2d 1016 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Feb 7, 1996

issues on the law and the evidence, in the absence of an admonition to the jury, are immune from appellate redress simply because there was not an objection to each such statement. … But, the above *1033 supreme court cases tell me quite clearly that fundamental error was never designed to be so amorphous.

SAFEWAY PREMIUM FINANCE CO. v. Sosa

15 So. 3d 8 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 8, 2009

See State Farm, 822 So.2d at 517 . [4] It is the burden of the party seeking class action status to establish the propriety of class action status. See Wyeth, Inc. v. … Given the geographical and chronological span of the class, numerosity was clearly established.

PROGRESSIVE EXP. INS. CO., INC. v. Menendez

979 So. 2d 324 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 19, 2008

Although the plaintiffs' lawsuit clearly arises out of events (the execution of the policy and Menendez's accident) predating the enactment of subsection 627.736(11), Florida Statutes (2001), applying subsection 627.736(11 … The addition of the qualifying phrase "to the extent applicable" makes it clear that presuit demand letters under subsection 627.736(11) are required where the information regarding medical care is inapplicable.

Brim v. State

779 So. 2d 427 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Oct 11, 2000

Brim provided testimony from a well-qualified expert who disagreed with the statistical methodology employed by the State's experts. … Mere numerical majority support or opposition by persons minimally qualified to state an authoritative opinion is of little value...." People v.

Enoch v. State

95 So. 3d 344 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 27, 2012

The statute did not improperly establish guilt by mere association. … Clearly, “[independent advocacy that might be viewed as promoting the group’s legitimacy is not covered.” Id.