Skip to Content

Florida Appeals Court Decisions Week of October 5 - 9, 2026

U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

Hernandez v. Fla Bar - bar admission fees challenge, Commerce Clause
USA v. Guerrero - Coast Guard, drug interdiction, jurisdiction, constitutional challenge
USA v. Brown - plea agreement, breach, sentencing
Martin v. USA - FTCA, exceptions, qualified immunity

Florida Supreme Court - Tallahassee


Derrick v. State - capital case, postconviction relief
In re Fla R GP&JA - amended rules, various
In re Fla R Civ P - amended rules, damages disclosures
In re R Reg Fla Bar - amended rules, various
In re Fla Prob R - amended rules, discovery
In re Fla R App P - amended rules, various
In re Fla R Juv P - amended rules, various
Thompson v. State - capital case, postconviction relief

First District Court of Appeal - Tallahassee


Velazquez v. State - evidence, polygraph
Smith v. State - prohibition, self-defense immunity
Gainesville RUA v. Gainesville - utility, intervening law change, mootness
DCF v. Gainey - sovereign immunity
Crandall Med v. Gainey - sovereign immunity, agents
Maitland v. McGovern - workers’ compensation
Patterson v. Van Diepen - eviction, possession, damages
Clark v. Amazon - record costs, insolvency
In re Grand Jury - grand jury, injunction, confidentiality
In re Grand Jury - grand jury, presentment publication

Second District Court of Appeal - St. Petersburg


Davis v. State - declining concession of error
State v. Mathis - sentencing
Washington v. Justice - appellate brief, fictitious citations, sanctions

Third District Court of Appeal - Miami


Hallman v. State - postconviction relief
Giroux v. Giroux - equitable distribution, alimony, fees, GAL, amendment without hearing
Gregorian v. New Century - jurisdictional discovery
Security Nat Ins v. Ascendant - 90.408, settlement offers, “skilled witness”
Rodriguez v. State - habeas, ineffective assistance
Linares v. Dezerland Park - exculpatory clause, negligence
Johnson v. State - Anders appeal
Gonzalez v. Resolvion - compel arbitration, non-signatory
Meb Loan v. Isaacs - probate, incapacity, foreclosure
Walters v. AHA - homestead, cooperative unit, retroactivity
Noel v. State - subject matter jurisdiction, misdemeanor
Menuez v. Westport - quiet title, res judicata
865 East 49th St v. Valdo - zero damages, no transcript
Lewis v. Fla Dept Rev - child support, notice of hearing
Gratigny Park v. Perez - certiorari, derivative claims, presuit requirements
JR v. Children’s Med Servs - Medicaid, plan appeal, fair hearing


Fourth District Court of Appeal - West Palm Beach


Fed Ins v. Perlmutter - punitive damages, amendment, intentional misconduct, vicarious liability
Rubin v. Sailfish Point - real estate purchase agreement, assignment, rescission, attorney’s fees
Faustin v. State - § 90.702, accident reconstruction, momentum analysis
Azulay v. Azulay - marital dissolution, contempt
Kid Int’l v. City National Bank - Gen AI, appellate sanctions
Kennedy v. Kennedy - marital settlement agreement, garnishment, law of the case
Paul v. Michel - name change of minor, § 68.07
Johnson v. Rollins - paternity, denial of continuance, hearing, due process

Fifth District Court of Appeal - Daytona Beach

Molo v. Molo - dissolution, alimony, child support
Oliver v. State - drug trafficking, possession; constructive possession
Santomenno v. EO Santomenno - personal representative, appointment; discretion, trial court
Aklipse Asset Mgmt v. Sec First Ins - appellate dismissal, premature appeal
Janosky v. Janosky - dissolution, lack of transcript, clear error
Sec First Ins v. Annon - attorney’s fees, contingency multiplier, substantial evidence; § 627.428, pre-repeal
Jenkins v. State - pro se filing restrictions
Marshall v. State - probation revocation, hearsay

Sixth District Court of Appeal - Lakeland

Hageman v. State - postconviction relief
Schildgen v. State - Apprendi, postconviction relief
Martin v. State - sentencing
Claircius v. Claircius - quo warranto
Reeves v. State - prison releasee reoffender
Robertson v. Orange County - final order
Suarez v. State - mandamus, competency
Colbert v. Colbert - prohibition, disqualification


The provided links above may be available for a limited time only, as courts sometimes relocate opinions on their websites. Should that occur, please use the “written opinions archive” links provided below each court header to search for the opinion using the case name. The availability of opinions through these channels may vary and is subject to the discretion of the courts.

Related Practices
Appellate & Trial Support
©2026 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.