Skip to Content

Florida Appeals Court Decisions: Week of August 23 - 27, 2021

U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

Adams v. School Bd - en banc
Murugan v. US AG - asylum, torture
Hayes v. Fla DOC - habeas
Travelers v. McKenzie & Sons - coverage, Coblentz agreement
Mitchell v. Smith - qualified immunity, First Amendment
Bradley v. Benton - qualified immunity, excessive force
Black Voters Matter Fund v. Ga Secy of State - voting rights

Florida Supreme Court - Tallahassee

Hilton v. State - capital case, postconviction relief
Baptiste v. State - invited error doctrine, fundamental error
Nixon v. State - capital case, postconviction relief
In re Mediators - new rule, mediator qualifications
In re Fla R Crim P 3.212 - amended rule, competence
In re Fla R Civ P 1.280 - amended rule, adopting apex doctrine

First District Court of Appeal - Tallahassee

May v. State - expert, Daubert; evidence, audit reports
Thompson v. State - ineffective assistance, appellate counsel
State v. Johnson - speedy trial
JEA v. Zahn - arbitration
Spaulding v. Spaulding - lack of findings, marital dissolution, preservation; conflict
Wick v. Orange Park Mgmt - arbitration; certified conflict

Second District Court of Appeal - Lakeland

AC v. State - juvenile, restitution, fee
Hart v. State - sentencing
Bruno v. Moreno - timesharing, modification; contempt

Third District Court of Appeal - Miami

Cole v. Citizens - insurable interest, standing
Viera v. In re Aptito v. Zell - attorney sanctions
Rodriguez v. Dept Business & Prof Reg - construction, admin
United v. Rivero Diagnostic- summary judgment, accord and satisfaction
Geico v. Hialeah Diagnostics - summary judgment, coverage
New Life Rehab v. Mercury - summary judgment, dissolved corporation
United v. West Medical - summary judgment, treatment
Perez v. State - child support
Lugo-Fernandez v. Inch - postconviction relief
Seme v. State - postconviction relief
Ramirez v. State - postconviction relief
McGee v. State - postconviction relief

Fourth District Court of Appeal - West Palm Beach

Waterfall Victoria v. McDonald - foreclosure, waiver
Dieuvil v. Falcon Trace HOA - default, jurisdiction
Tate v. State - postconviction order, harm
Dawn Rene Holding v. World Jet - injunction, bond
Javan v. Seawinds South - arbitration
Allstate v. Sasso - PIP, fee schedule
TMW v. DCF - permanent guardianship, due process
Cordaro v. DHS - license suspension, certified conflict

Fifth District Court of Appeal - Daytona Beach

Smith v. State - Spencer bar, pro se
Colantonio v. Moog - unlawful detainer, lease
HFC Collection v. Alexander - fees, costs; enforce mandate
Schiedenhelm v. State - jail credit
DCF v. State - judgment, non-party, jurisdiction

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.