Case law

State Ex Rel. Lowe v. Nelson

202 So. 2d 232 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 15, 1967

The right of the defendant here violated, does not stem from the recent more liberal decisions above, but is one which basically has been an established right for years. … The transcript of the proceedings before Grand Jury clearly shows that the State Attorney was not overly friendly nor overly zealous in advising the defendant of his rights.

L.M.P. ex rel. E.P. v. School Board

516 F. Supp. 2d 1305 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 27, 2007

Defendants also assert qualified immunity as a defense to the § 1985 claim. … Accordingly, Defendants qualified immunity defense fails.

From v. Tallahassee Democrat, Inc.

400 So. 2d 52 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 28, 1981

One of the privileges established by common law was that of "fair comment". This qualified privilege allowed a publisher to express an opinion or otherwise comment on matters of public interest. … In other words, defamatory matter uttered concerning a private figure gains no immunity from the notion, contradicting alleged fact, that by nature an opinion cannot have falsely described plaintiff; such defaming gains immunity

Pate v. Worthington

679 So. 2d 790 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 20, 1996

Mirkhani and Worthington moved for summary judgment on the basis that the actions of the three inmates were unforeseeable and therefore they acted reasonably and, in any event, they were entitled to qualified immunity. … established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person should have known.

Hill v. Hill

415 So. 2d 20 · Supreme Court of Florida · Apr 29, 1982

Interspousal tort immunity is a judicial doctrine established to protect the family unit. … We recognize that intentional tortious conduct by one spouse against the other clearly shows marital disharmony and, in many instances of serious tortious conduct by one spouse against the other, a dissolution proceeding

Curry

District Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 18, 2026

Qualified Immunity Finally, Thorne argues that qualified immunity bars Curry’s claim against him. (Doc. 32 at 5-6). … “Qualified immunity protects government officials from individual liability unless they violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Berry

District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 3, 2025

“[A] police officer is entitled to qualified immunity if a reasonable police officer could have believed his or her actions were lawful in light of clearly established law and the information … When considering qualified immunity for malicious prosecution claims, the court also reviews for arguable probable cause and whether the law was clearly established. Prospero v.

Ago

Florida Attorney General Reports · May 27, 1997

While a trustee may consider the advice of qualified experts, the trustee ultimately must exercise independent judgment in making these decisions. … And see, subsection (5) of the statute establishing the monetary limitations of the state's waiver of sovereign immunity at $100,000 for a claim or judgment by one person or $200,000 for all claims or judgments arising out

Sancho v. Joanos

715 So. 2d 382 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 25, 1998

In this regard, the extraordinary writ of mandamus may not be used to establish the existence of an enforceable right, but rather only to enforce a right already clearly and certainly established in law. … Where a candidate presents himself before a filing officer for qualifying during the first four days of the qualifying period and submits incomplete qualifying documents, the filing officer clearly has a duty under section

American Home Assur. v. NAT. RR CORP.

908 So. 2d 459 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jul 7, 2005

Fla.2000-22 (2000) (advising county that it may not agree to indemnify another party to a contract or alter the state's waiver of sovereign immunity beyond the limits established in section 768.28); Op. Att'y Gen. … While the crossing agreement is a contract, the provision at issue clearly relates to tort liability.

Fagan v. Jackson County Hospital District, Jackson Hospital

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Feb 14, 2024

Although conceding he did not notify DFS within that time limit, Appellant argues instead that, because chapter 766 establishes presuit investigation requirements that apply to claims against both non-immune defendants and … Contrary to Appellant’s argument, the court there clearly distinguished between the two statutory schemes.

Tuyuana L. Morris, etc. v. Orlando S. Muniz, M.D.

252 So. 3d 1143 · Supreme Court of Florida · Sep 6, 2018

Thompson's affidavit clearly established her qualifications, that should have been the end of the matter. … We conclude that neither section 766.203(4) nor our opinion in Williams allows a deposition of a presuit expert where, as in this case, the presuit expert's affidavit clearly establishes that the expert is qualified under

Anthony Rojas v. University of Florida Board of Trustees

Supreme Court of Florida · Jul 17, 2025

Section 1009.24(14)(r) authorizes universities to establish “transportation access fees.” … Because “the legislature has clearly intended” that the contracts it authorizes “be valid and binding on both parties,” it therefore waives the sovereign immunity that would render them not binding on the government.

Fast Tract Framing, Inc. v. Caraballo

994 So. 2d 355 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 15, 2008

If this meaning is unambiguous "and conveys a clear and definite meaning, that meaning controls unless it leads to a result that is either unreasonable or clearly contrary to legislative intent." Id. … It seems to me that the effect of the decision is to immunize employers who elect to hire undocumented aliens. They will never have to pay for workplace injuries, because their employees are not receiving "wages."

Clemmons v. State

141 So. 2d 749 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 26, 1962

Clearly, the Coons case establishes no precedent as to the exercising of the power of contempt in a jurisdiction, such as ours, that has long recognized the independence of a grand jury by constitutional provisions and by … I therefore interpret the Brautigam decision as establishing the rule of law in Florida that a grand jury is not immune from punishment by contempt proceedings if it files a report containing scurrilous or defamatory statements

Williams v. Pan American World Airways, Inc.

448 So. 2d 68 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 10, 1984

purportedly "sublet" work of carrying baggage was, at best, but a small, surely not indispensable portion and was thus, to use the legal term of art, merely "incidental" to the essence of the "prime contracts" — which was clearly … contract work to a subcontractor or subcontractors, all of the employees of such contractor and subcontractor or subcontractors engaged on such contract work shall be deemed to be employed in one and the same business or establishment

Bifulco v. Patient Business & Financial Services, Inc.

35 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 368 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jun 24, 2010

BACKGROUND Patient Business & Financial Services (PBFS) is a nonprofit corporation established solely to perform billing services for Halifax Hospital Medical Center, which is a special taxing district of the State of Florida … The First District in Kelley held that “[a]n action for retaliatory discharge under section 440.205 is clearly a ‘tort’ within the meaning of section 768.28 and presuit notice is therefore required. Scott v.

Ocean Products, Inc. v. Schleman

23 Fla. Supp. 198 · Circuit Court of the 13th Judicial Circuit of Florida, Hillsborough County · Sep 4, 1964

Sparkman, 99 So. 2d. 571 (Fla. 1958), the Supreme Court of Florida clearly held that land owned by Hillsborough County was immune from taxation. … Doss, 46 So. 2d. 888 (Fla. 1950), the tax imposed can clearly be sustained on such basis. See also Riviera Club v. Belle Mead Development Corp., 141 Fla. 538 , 194 So. 783 , (1939), and State Road Department v.

Frakes

District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 5, 2026

A right may be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes in one of three ways: (1) case law with indistinguishable facts clearly establishing the constitutional right; (2) a broad statement of … Thus, at the very least, Plaintiff has not shown the law is “clearly established” on this issue, so Plaintiff has not met her burden to overcome qualified immunity.

Cramer v. State of Florida

885 F. Supp. 1545 · District Court, M.D. Florida · May 10, 1995

Thus, in order to state a claim under the ADA, a plaintiff must first establish that he is a “qualified individual with a disability.” … The Court noted that “the law governing § 504 did not clearly establish an obligation to meet the plaintiffs particular needs vis-a-vis the needs of other handicapped individuals, but mandated only that services provided