Skip to Content

Florida Appeals Court Decisions: Week of March 29 - April 2, 2021

U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

Babb v. Sec’y, Dept of VA - employment, discrimination, hostile environment
O’Neal v. DRT Am - arbitration, vacatur motion, service
Hylton v. USA AG - immigration
Thomas v. Fla AG - habeas corpus
Buland v. NCL (Bahamas) - loss of earning capacity, evidence

Florida Supreme Court - Tallahassee

Willacy v. State - capital case, postconviction relief
In re Fla R Crim Pro - amended rules

First District Court of Appeal - Tallahassee

Reliable Rest v. Panama Commons - certiorari, stay, comity
Couture v. Couture - timesharing
Williams v. State - principal to murder, evidence
DOT v. Miami-Dade - public official standing doctrine
Lowery v. State - postconviction relief
Smith v. State - postconviction relief
Dorsey v. State - circumstantial evidence
Garmon v. State - prior inconsistent statement
Boyleston Realty v. Beasley - auction contract, breach
Walls v. So Owners - insurance coverage
Intal v. Mancera - workers’ compensation
Anderson v. State - ineffective assistance, appellate counsel
Morris v. Inch - untimely appeal
Johnson v. State - postconviction relief
Givens v. State - postconviction relief
Brown v. DOC - exhaustion, administrative remedies
Hagins v. Inch - untimely appeal

Second District Court of Appeal - Lakeland

Johnson v. State - sentencing
Nutter & Co v. Estate of Cosby - foreclosure, continuance
Owens v. State - search and seizure

Third District Court of Appeal - Miami

Maps v. State - Faretta inquiry
Helinski v. Helinski - fees, guardian ad litem
Fasang-Brown v. Visit Us - forum non conveniens
Giller v. Giller - appellate jurisdiction, nonfinal order
Afanasiev v. Alvarez - prohibition, disqualification
Lemos v. Sessa - arbitration
Evans v. State - postconviction relief

Fourth District Court of Appeal - West Palm Beach

Willingham v. State – video, authentication; sentencing
Rabadan v. Rabadan – alimony, net income
Hernandez-Perez v. State – jury question; Daubert, preservation
Butler v. StateMarsy’s Law, victim’s family, exclusion
Stamper v. Sahal – defamation; default, damages
Arguello v. People’s Trust – insurance, proof of loss
King v. King – child support, calculation
Aiello v. ASI Preferred – insurance, watercraft exclusion
Merrick Preserve v. Cypress Prop – insurance, appraisal
Bronstein v. Allstate – PIP, amending complaint, untimely

Fifth District Court of Appeal - Daytona Beach

Hull v. State - custodial arrest, local ordinance
Worthington v. State - Anders appeal, oral pronouncement
Hand v. State - correct sentence    
White v. Marks - will, standing to contest, paternity
McConnell v. State - postconviction relief

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.