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 July 29 - August 2, 2019
August 03, 2019

U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

Gorss Motels v. Safemark Systems - TCPA
US v. Feldman - double jeopardy
In re Navarro - sentencing, successive motions
In re Palacios - sentencing, successive motions
City of Miami Gardens v. Wells Fargo - standing, FHA
Paez v. Fla DOC - habeas corpus
Al-Amin v. Ga DOC - habeas corpus
In re Pollard - sentencing, successive motions
Peoples Gas v. Posen Constr - utilities, indemnification, certified question

Florida Supreme Court - Tallahassee

No decisions this week.

First District Court of Appeal - Tallahassee

Williams v. State - fundamental error, new trial standard
State v. Gainesville Woman Care - abortion, 24-hour waiting period
Eversole v. State - right to counsel, police interview
SBCR v. Doss - workers' compensation
Palmentere Bros v. Copeland - settlement proposal
Abaunza v. State - sexually violent predator commitment
MJM Elec v. Spencer - workers' compensation
Publix v. Carter - workers' compensation

Second District Court of Appeal - Lakeland

Wilson v. State - postconviction relief
Nieves v. State - search and seizure, resisting officer
Foster v. State - postconviction relief
Gammage v. State - double jeopardy, postconviction relief
Johnson v. State - postconviction relief
Cooper v. Cooper - alimony, findings
Jeansimon v. State - closing argument, state's burden, police credibility
State v. MBW - search and seizure
JS v. State - Richardson hearing

Third District Court of Appeal - Miami

Pena-Vazquez v. State - double jeopardy
Lattanzio v. Hoffmann - order striking pleadings
State v. Martin - post-Miranda statements
Lovest v. Mangiero - guardianship
FP&L v. Cook - certiorari, corporate deposition
Byrd v. State - pro se sanctions
Windhaven Ins v. Mesquita - certiorari, corporate deposition
EPV v. DCF - mental health exam
Garcia v. State - belated appeal
Olive v. Glansen - second-tier certiorari, appellate fees

Fourth District Court of Appeal - West Palm Beach

Kemp v. State - Daubert
Taylor v. State - sentencing
Miller v. Homeland Prop Assn - summary judgment, business judgment rule
Collins v. Auto Partners - summary judgment, Graves Amendment
Sidiq v. Tower Hill - insurance, assignment
Yanofsky v. Isaacs - sanctions, unliquidated damages
Postma v. Baker - contract interpretation
Manor Oaks v. Campbell - healthcare surrogate, arbitration
Zieler v. State - competency, jurisdiction
Simeone v. State - certification, veterans' court
Norman v. Jaimes - recorded lien, constructive notice

Fifth District Court of Appeal - Daytona Beach

Mootry v. Bethune-Cookman - improper closing argument
Manor House v. Citizens Prop Ins- certified question; insurance
Wells Fargo v. Stephenson - foreclosure, standing
Romero v. State - postconviction relief
Chester v. State - postconviction relief
Johnson v. State - pro se warning
Gray v. State- Spencer warning
White v. State - sentencing
Gardner v. State - Spencer bar
Wynn v. State - sentencing
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.