Skip to Content

Florida Appeals Court Decisions: Week of January 1 - 5, 2018

U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

Vibe Micro v. Shabanets - shotgun pleadings, Rule 8 
US v. Crabtree - healthcare fraud, double jeopardy, sentencing 
King v. US - False Claims Act, sovereign immunity 
Jara v. Nunez - Alien Tort Statute, extraterritorial conduct 
US v. Foster - real estate fraud, restitution, sentencing

Florida Supreme Court – Tallahassee

No decisions this week

First District Court of Appeal – Tallahassee

Atwater v. State - criminal competency 
US Bank v. Tranumn - certiorari, severance 
State Farm v. Hawkinson - UM coverage 
DOH v. Bayfront - injunction, trauma center operation 
Brown v. Brown - appellate jurisdiction 
Robinson v. Robinson - rule 1.540, intrinsic fraud, marital settlement 
Markovits v. State Farm - settlement proposal; service on CFO

Second District Court of Appeal – Lakeland

Black Pt v. MCM Cap - foreclosure, fees 
Baez v. State - informant's testimony, exclusion 
Dixon v. Dixon - child support, age of majority 
CM v. State - self-defense 
Jacobson v. State - postconviction relief 
Kremps v. Manatee Cnty - employment, appellate jurisdiction 
Price v. Price - equitable distribution 
GAL v. JW - dependency 
Rosado v. State - postconviction relief 
Greenberg Traurig v. Starling - charging lien 
JC v. State - culpable motion 
Lowe v. Nissan - arbitration; certified conflict 
Furman v. Furman - certiorari; attorney disqualification 
Sun ‘n Lake v. Ayala - sovereign immunity, FDUTPA

Third District Court of Appeal – Miami

DOR v. Augustin - paternity, child support 
Jockey Club v. BVK - rule 1.540, appellate jurisdiction 
Carnival v. Garcia - venue, admiralty, cruise ship 
GEICO v. Martinez - certiorari, premature bad faith claim 
Percival v. Capps - certiorari, tenant eviction 
Rhines v. State - plea withdrawal, appellate jurisdiction 
Queiroz v. Bentley Bay - corporate officers, service during deposition 
Klein v. State - prohibition, speedy trial 
Arancibia v. Castillo - prohibition, post-dismissal orders

Fourth District Court of Appeal – West Palm Beach

No decisions this week

Fifth District Court of Appeal – Daytona Beach

Wells Fargo v. Bird - attorney's fees; void mortgage 
Ash v. State - criminal, scrivener's error 
Gustavsson v. Holder - additur; compromised verdict 
McNulty v. Bowser - en banc; attorney's fees, § 742.045 
Discount Sleep v. City of Ocala - class certification, ordinance 
Linden v. Reemployment Comm - administrative appeal, timeliness
Related Practices
Appellate & Trial Support
©2024 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.


The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.