Case law

McFadden v. County of Orange

12 Fla. L. Weekly 61 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 24, 1986

Clearly, this type of failure may serve as the basis for an action against the governmental entity. Ralph at 2 . … In this case, the documents in the record established that Orange County has the responsibility for maintaining and supervising this intersection.

Bruce Fuller v. State

257 So. 3d 521 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 24, 2018

merely established his historical use of drugs. … In Devon, the supreme court specifically found the amended statute it was reviewing “was clearly substantive.” Id. at 195.

Manors of Inverrary XII Condo. Ass'n v. Atreco-Fla., Inc.

438 So. 2d 490 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 28, 1983

United States, 346 U.S. 15 , 73 S.Ct. 956 , 97 L.Ed. 1427 (1953), the court of appeals stated governmental immunity applies to executive and administrative decisions "which either establish a rule for future governmental … The extension of liability for negligent inspection is clearly predicated on a need to insure public safety.

Brand v. Florida Power Corp.

633 So. 2d 504 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 7, 1994

by section 504 place the burden on a plaintiff to establish a prima facie case of employment discrimination by showing (1) that he or she is a handicapped individual under the act; (2) that he or she is otherwise qualified … Indeed, the provisions of section 501 clearly appear to have motivated the Mantolete decision.

Hallendy v. Florida Atlantic University

16 So. 3d 1057 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 16, 2009

Section 1009.21, Florida Statutes (2008), provides: (2)(a) To qualify as a resident for tuition purposes: 1. … It reviewed all of the evidence presented and simply determined that the submissions did not clearly show that Hallendy’s residence in Florida was not merely incident to her enrollment in a *1060 higher education institution

Robinson's, Inc. v. Short

146 So. 2d 108 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Nov 1, 1962

Such language is entirely too vague and indefinite to establish a base upon which competitive bids may be submitted. … Burr [17] established the principle that recovery, in certain type cases such as the one being considered, could be had upon quantum valebant.

Gordon v. State

312 So. 2d 809 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 20, 1975

Defendant clearly managed to establish before the jury that Garrett had been charged along with the defendant for the crime involved in this case. … When the defendant through counsel attempted to elicit whether or not the State had granted immunity to Garrett, the witness responded that he didn't know, and the court sustained objections to counsel's repeated inquiry

Folds v. JA Jones Const. Co.

875 So. 2d 700 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 3, 2004

Three exceptions are recognized to the bar of immunity provided in section 440.11. … The rule is firmly established that summary judgment will be affirmed if the allegations of the complaint and the evidence show only that the employer was negligent or grossly negligent, but fail to show an intentional tort

Jacksonville Roofing & Sheet Metal Contractors Ass'n v. Local Union No. 435, Sheet Metal Workers' International Ass'n

156 So. 2d 416 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 19, 1963

No abuse of such prerogative has been clearly demonstrated.” … In view of the cited Florida decisions, in the final analysis the question before us is whether the appellant has clearly demonstrated that the chancellor abused his sound judicial discretion in dismissing the cause without

Strickland v. Department of Agriculture

922 So. 2d 1022 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Feb 17, 2006

In Palmer , the Court very clearly held that government is immune from tort liability to individual property owners for damage resulting from the discretionary actions of fire fighters in combating fires. Id. … However, it has long been established that the government's destruction of private property to "prevent the spreading of a fire" is not a "taking in the constitutional sense." E.g., Omnia Commercial Co., Inc. v.

Johnson v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co.

297 So. 2d 858 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 26, 1974

The record clearly establishes that security had been provided by both drivers (Stockton and Christensen) as required by sec. 627.733, F.S. … We need not reach the merits of this contention, since the record clearly reflects that appellants are residents of this state and hence without standing to invoke this argument.

Technicable Video Sys. v. Americable

479 So. 2d 810 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 10, 1985

Clearly, the licensee is subject to liability to anyone possessing rights created by the license. … Technicable is simply seeking judicial enforcement of a right which the parties clearly intended to create.

STATE OF FLORIDA v. WENDY B. CARRIER

240 So. 3d 852 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 9, 2018

First, she altered the text boxes for immunizations by removing the lines because all the immunizations would not fit on the form. … Carrier's establishment. The last six counts charged were for dogs that were purchased from Ms. Carrier's establishment and became sick and, in some cases, died.

Davis v. Swatts

556 So. 2d 467 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 31, 1990

If there is no prior court order establishing an obligation of support, the court shall establish the liability of the obligor, if any, for reimbursement of public assistance monies paid. (Emphasis added.) … We find that the appellee was not immune from liability for reimbursement simply because she was a custodial parent who was not under a support order.

The Florida International University Board of Trustees v. Signal Safe, Inc., a Florida Corporation

District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 22, 2024

the extent that Signal Safe contends in the cross-appeal that the trial court erred in rejecting its breach of contract claim, it is well- 7 settled that a non-signatory must establish … Consequently, third-party beneficiary status is only conferred “if the parties to the contract clearly express, or the contract itself expresses, an intent to primarily and directly benefit the third party.”

LA FITNESS INTERNATIONAL, LLC. v. Mayer

980 So. 2d 550 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 23, 2008

In addition to a written emergency plan, in 2003 IHRSCA required facilities to have qualified persons on duty. In Abbott's opinion, L.A. Fitness did not have a CPR-qualified person on duty when Tringali was injured. … Neither party has provided us with any statutory or case law in Florida that clearly delineates the duties owed by a health club or gym to patrons facing a medical emergency. L.A.

A Advocates & Attorneys of Kennedy Law Group, Kennedy Law Group v. Swope, Swope, Rodante, P. A.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 29, 2026

Uiterwyk alleged that her actions were justified and privileged, that they were "undertaken to safeguard or promote [her] preexisting financial or economic interests," and thus, that she was immune from liability. … Uiterwyk moved to dismiss the complaint based in part upon her defenses, including that she was immune from liability because her actions were justified and privileged, not malicious.

Wilson v. Pest Control Commission of Florida

199 So. 2d 777 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 24, 1967

To effectually establish the constitutionality of F.S.A. ch. 482 the legislature intended the pest control commission to be guided by F.S.A. ch. 120 commonly known as the Administrative Procedure Act. *780 The Administrative … The evidence irrefutably shows that the petitioner qualified for a certificate under the grandfather clause of the Pest Control Act certifying him as a pest control operator to engage in lawn and ornamental pest control and

DYKES BY DYKES v. City of Apalachicola

645 So. 2d 50 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Oct 28, 1994

immune. … To the extent that this argument is made in the context of sovereign immunity, we reject it.

Metropolitan Dade County v. State Department of Environmental Protection

714 So. 2d 512 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 10, 1998

Sekoff owns the property where Redd’s Cleaners, a'dry-cleaning establishment, had been operating. FDEP granted Sekoff eligibility to participate in the Program. … This court held that “the legislature has clearly expressed its intention that the Act is to be retroactively applied.” Metropolitan Dade County v.