Skip to Content

Florida Appeals Court Decisions: Week of April 11 - 15, 2022
April 16, 2022

U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

US v. Moss - health care fraud
Dotson v. US - time bar
US v. Woodson - Miranda, sentencing, concurrence
Thayer v. Chevrolet Buick Cadillac - liability for loaner cars
US v. Hakim - waiver of counsel, dissent
Wells v. Warden - en banc order, vacating this PLRA "three strikes" case

Florida Supreme Court - Tallahassee

No opinions this week.

First District Court of Appeal - Tallahassee

Escambia Cnty Sch Bd v. Warren - administrative standing, raised sua sponte
Harris v. State - sentencing
Robinson v. State - sentencing
Patterson v. State - evidence, personal knowledge, authentication
Washington v. DOR - employment, discrimination, retaliation
Pappas v. State - postconviction relief
Poggi v. FWCC - administrative appeal, jurisdiction
Knowles v. State - postconviction relief
Amtec Less Lethal v. Fowler - appellate jurisdiction, rule 9.130

Second District Court of Appeal - Lakeland

Shazam Auto Glass v. GEICO - appellate jurisdiction, circuit court fee order
KB Home v. Taishan Gypsum - finality, adopting magistrate order, vacating default
Mauriello v. POA Lake Parker Estates - prevailing party fees
Maderi v. State - certiorari, court intervention program, admission
Ryan v. State - sentencing
Clerk Collier Cnty v. Brandon - bail bond, forfeiture, remission

Third District Court of Appeal - Miami

1000 Brickell v. Miami - real property, municipal dedication, reverter
Sadlak v. Trujillo - child support, imputed income
Miami Dade College v. Verdini - sovereign immunity
Sadlak v. Trujillo - family law case, trial court transfer
Ramos v. Miami-Dade - negligence, sudden stop
Peng v. Citizens - Daubert, outcome determinative
Miami v. Blanco - certiorari, video recordings, law enforcement

Fourth District Court of Appeal - West Palm Beach

PBC School Brd v. Groover - Public Sector Whistleblower Act, equitable relief
Philip Morris v. Gore - proposals for settlement, attorney's fees, double recovery
Dean v. State - Marsy's Law, victim rights
Godfrey v. People's Trust Ins - insurance, proof of loss
Ceballos v. Barreto - parenting plan, due process

Fifth District Court of Appeal - Daytona Beach

Teet v. State - sexual battery, child; custodial authority
City of Cocoa v. The Villas - temporary injunction, contract
Payne v. Koch - certiorari; child, behavioral therapy
Related Practices
Appellate & Trial Support
©2025 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.

Disclaimer

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.