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 March 4 - 8, 2019
March 09, 2019

U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

King v. Polk Cnty - First Amendment, retaliation
Quality Auto v. State Farm - antitrust
US v. Gibbs - search and seizure
US v. Padgett - appellate jurisdiction
US v. Gandy - sentencing
Patel v. US - immigration
Estrada v. Becker - equal protection
Schuster v. Social Security - attorney's fees

Florida Supreme Court - Tallahassee

No decisions this week

First District Court of Appeal - Tallahassee

MKL Ent v. Am Traditions - appraisal
Marine Max v. Blair - workers' compensation, medical charges
Simmons v. State - sentencing
Bryant v. State - search and seizure
McCrae v. State - sentencing
DBPR v. Horsemen's BPA - rule challenge, drugs, horseracing
McCray v. State - postconviction relief
Jenkins v. State - sentence
Petty v. State - criminal contempt
Jackson v. Tallahassee - Sunshine law, city commission

Second District Court of Appeal - Lakeland

Peterson v. State - search and seizure
State v. Pettis - search and seizure, standing
NRG v. MDC 6 - lack of prosecution, deficiency action
Byun v. State - double jeopardy
Carlton v. Zanazzi - rule 1.540, subject matter jurisdiction

Third District Court of Appeal - Miami

Jones v. State - fundamental error
Grisales v. Eber - independent contractor
Echevarria v. State - juvenile sentencing, Graham
Kennedy v. 1st Protective - appraisal
Lanson v. Reid - appellate jurisdiction, final order
Loor v. State - habeas corpus

Fourth District Court of Appeal - West Palm Beach

Grant v. State - jury instruction, fundamental error
Bellezza v. Menendez - attorney-client privilege
Schwartz v. Bank of Am - foreclosure, standing
Johnson v. State - exploitation, valuation
Stewart Agency v. Arrigo - FDUTPA, causation
Shah v. Transdermal Delivery Solutions - excusable neglect
Moreno v. State - probation, scoresheet
Laux v. Laux - attorney's fees
Welton v. Welton - dissolution, improper dissipation
Delta Aggregate v. Hermes Hialeah - lis pendens, discharge
Johnson v. State - habeas corpus
Lightsey v. Davis - paternity
Rosado v. State - postconviction relief, sanctions
Hawkins v. State - prohibition, speedy trial

Fifth District Court of Appeal - Daytona Beach

Restal v. Nocera - comparative negligence, summary judgment
Lally Orange v. Sandhu - valuation, substantial evidence
Englert v. HSBC Bank - foreclosure, attorney's fees
Mattison v. Mattison - dissolution, child support, equitable distribution
Campanhac v. Lauramore - stalking injunction, substantial evidence
Otero v. Bank of NY - Spencer bar, pro se
Monts v. State - Spencer bar, pro se
Greene v. State - prison filing, service date
Pizarro-Garcia v. State - scrivener's error
Batista-Irizarry v. State - postconviction relief
State v. Knowles - certiorari, prior acts, molestation
Pettis v. State - jail credit
Sparber 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.