Skip to Content

Florida Appeals Court Decisions: Week of October 4 - 8, 2021

U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

No decisions this week.

Florida Supreme Court - Tallahassee

In re Fla R Civ P - amended discovery rules, effective 10/15/21
Boston v. State - Stand Your Ground
Levy v. Levy - family law, settlement agreement, attorney’s fees

First District Court of Appeal - Tallahassee

Harris v. State - sentencing
Wilson v. State - criminal restitution
Bowie v. State - preservation of error
Townsend v. Mansfield - probate, attorney’s fees
Cabrera v. Kablelink - workers’ compensation
Thornton v. State - postconviction relief
Phillips v. Pritchett Trucking - liens, clerk of court, recordation date
Shelton v. Pasco Comm’rs - workers’ compensation
Carnes v. Ford - certiorari, expert discovery
Davis v. State - postconviction relief
Jackson v. State - postconviction relief
Rivera v. Cline - appellate jurisdiction
Melvin v. Progressive - prohibition, judicial disqualification
Brewer v. DOC - mandamus, duty to rule
Henry v. State - appellate jurisdiction, timeliness
Garvey v. Workforce Bus Servs - mandamus, clear right
AE v. DCF - parental rights, termination
EM v. DCF - parental rights, termination

Second District Court of Appeal - Lakeland

Wish v. Lee Cnty - Bert Harris Act, certified question
DeSantis v. Skyline Healthcare - rule 1.190, amending pleadings

Third District Court of Appeal - Miami

Lucas v. Florida - criminal, evidence, sentencing
Ardura v. Beracha - summary judgment, res judicata
JD’s Asphalt v. Arch - construction, bond, summary judgment, bench trial
Barak v. ACS - UCC, preemption, civil theft, conversion
Garcia v. Evertz - notice of appeal, timeliness
Pomelli v. Pomelli - interlocutory, atty’s fees, sanctions
Akuwudike v. McKenzie - procedural jurisdiction
Shechter v. RV Sales - dissolution, summary judgment, damages
First Equitable Realty v. Grandview Palace - condo, declaration
Florida v. In re Forfeiture - currency seizure
CEDA Health v. State Farm - summary judgment, false billing
AIRS v. Citizens - summary judgment
Tavares v. 139th Ave - atty’s fees
State Farm v. Shotwell - coverage
Hernandez v. State - postconviction relief
Ramos v. Estate - summary judgment, tenancy by the entirety
Lindsey v. State - postconviction relief
Cerda v. Coral Gables - certiorari, procedural due process
Vialva v. Nunez - prohibition, judicial disqualification
Miller v. Mitchell - prohibition, UCCJEA
Miami-Dade School Bd v. FDH - COVID-19, mootness, fee entitlement

Fourth District Court of Appeal - West Palm Beach

Chamblee v. Figueroa - rehearing, timely service
Progressive v. Head To Toe - chiropractor services, PIP
Minus v. Brockman - paternity, required attachments
In re Adoption of JSM - adoption, venue

Fifth District Court of Appeal - Daytona Beach

Abouzaid v. Helmy - appellate fees
Wilson v. State - ineffective assistance, trial
Sullins v. State - postconviction relief
Douglas v. Douglas - dissolution, imputed income, alimony
DT v. DCF - parental rights, termination

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.