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.

 Skip to Content

Florida Appeals Court Decisions: Week of February 19 - 23, 2018
February 19, 2018

U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

Lloyd's v. Expeditors Korea - insurance, treaty 
US v. Deshazior - sentencing, ACCA 
Cintron v. US - immigration 
Bowen v. Manheim Remarketing - Equal Pay Act, Title VII 
US v. Joyner - felon possessing firearm, ACCA 
Levy v. US - rehearing, immigration


Florida Supreme Court – Tallahassee

Fla Bar v. Ratiner - attorney discipline 
Wall v. State - capital case, direct appeal 
Guzman v. State - capital case, direct appeal 
Williams v. State - juvenile sentencing


First District Court of Appeal – Tallahassee

Knight v. State - waiving jury instruction error; certified question, conflict 
Schramm v. State - double jeopardy 
Jackson v. State - search and seizure, sentencing 
Brown v. State - standard jury instructions, criminal 
Ivey v. State - jury selection, waiver, certified question 
Cummings v. State - search and seizure 
Barlow v. State - sentencing 
Hernandez v. Hialeah Solid Waste - workers’ compensation 
Siegmeister v. Johnson - public records 
Welch v. State - habeas corpus, venue 
Kerr v. Second Circuit - mandamus 
FHP v. Jackson - sovereign immunity, certified question 
Eberhart v. Eberhart - marital settlement agreement 
Paradise v. Neptune Fish - workers’ compensation 
Ring Power v. Murphy - workers’ compensation 
Brooks v. Brooks - certiorari, mental health records 
State v. Lantz - voluntary statements 
Bigham v. State - sentencing


Second District Court of Appeal – Lakeland

Lucas v. State - sentencing, certified conflict 
Asset Mgmt v. Assets Recovery - breach of contract, damages 
Gonzalez v. State - mandamus, public records 
Stump v. State - sentencing, jurisdiction


Third District Court of Appeal – Miami

Hines & Long v. New Urban Pine Rd - foreclosure, standing, lost note 
Liork v. BH 150 2nd Ave - contract, mutuality, liquidated damages 
Castillo v. Costco - proposal for settlement, rule 1.442 
Schlesinger v. Jacob - guardianship, fees, costs 
Coconut Grove Acq v. S&C Venture - foreclosure 
Key Biscayne Gateway v. Key Biscayne - § 57.105, sanctions 
Marin v. Infinity Auto Ins - settlement enforcement 
IL v. State - delinquency 
Del Pino Allen v. Santelises - defamation, immunity 
MZ v. Carnival - forum selection clause 
Carbonell v. WVUE - foreclosure, debt amount 
Arceri v. State - certiorari, Stand Your Ground


Fourth District Court of Appeal – West Palm Beach

Scotsman v. State - Miranda 
Harrington v. State - probating violation; sentencing 
Panaro v. State - competency; stipulation 
Mack v. Repole - appellate jurisdiction 
Noel v. State - sentencing 
Shelswell v. Bourdeau - appellate jurisdiction; preservation 
Clayton v. Poggendorf - enforcement; settlement agreement; agency


Fifth District Court of Appeal – Daytona Beach

Wilmington Trust v. Moon - foreclosure, standing 
Perez v. Perez - equitable distribution 
Stufft v. Stufft - equitable distribution, support 
Doyle v. State - double jeopardy 
Dyck-O’Neal v. Germany - deficiency judgment, limitations 
Hicks v. Am Integrity - insurance, seepage exclusion 
Pitcher v. Schneider - paternity, lack of transcript 
Moore v. Estate of Albee - § 57.105, sanctions
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.