Menu

Florida Appeals Court Decisions: Week of February 1 - 5, 2021

Appellate & Trial Support   |   February 5, 2021
Download Download   
Share Share Page

U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

Cherry v. Dometic Corp - class certification, administrative feasibility
Pincus v. ATS - traffic ticket, certifying questions to Fla Sup Ct
USA v. Cannon - criminal, discovery, indictment, entrapment
Barmapov v. Amuial - shotgun pleading
Tsao v. PDQ - data breach, standing, concrete injury
Ruiz v. Officer - notice of appeal tolling, evidence, improper comments, mistrial
USA v. Morales- search and seizure
Armstrong v. USA- postconviction relief

Florida Supreme Court - Tallahassee

Harvey v. State - capital case, postconviction relief
Randolph v. State - capital case, postconviction relief

First District Court of Appeal - Tallahassee

Hester v. State - pro se sanctions
Boldridge v. State - Confrontation Clause
Hartfield v. State - postconviction relief

Second District Court of Appeal - Lakeland

Peterson v. Peterson - equitable distribution
US Bank v. Dick - foreclosure, standing
Shaffer v. Deutsche Bank - costs, appeal before ruling
Gulfcoast Spine v. Walker - certiorari, discovery, trade secrets
Hunter v. Catalano - homeowners association, presuit mediation
Livingston v. State - criminal restitution, fees, Rowe findings
LIV I v. Brown - certiorari, judgment creditor, intervention

Third District Court of Appeal - Miami

Bates v. Bates - prenuptial agreement, validity
Hendel v. Internet Escrow - forum selection clause
Martinez-Rivero v. State - antishoplifting countermeasures
Hannibal v. Navarro - probate, will, undue influence
Weiss v. Weiss - close case order, unresolved claims
People's Trust v. Gonzalez - certiorari, payment before final judgment
Am Prime Title v. Wang - certiorari, discovery, settlement agreements
Shimon v. RB - certiorari, discovery, Fifth Amendment
Ottawa Props v. US Bank - service of process
Brown v. State - postconviction relief
Vazquez v. Smith - prohibition, judicial disqualification

Fourth District Court of Appeal - West Palm Beach

FH Paschen v. B&B Site - subcontract, scope; implied contract
Boca Center v. Boca Raton - Bert Harris Act, comprehensive plan
Levine v. State - indirect criminal contempt, essential facts
RJ Reynolds v. McClain - prohibition; judicial disqualification

Fifth District Court of Appeal - Daytona Beach

Luebbert v. Adventist Health- summary judgment, vicarious liability
Bova v. State - murder; self-representation, capacity
Manago v. State - certified conflict, resentencing
Yarger v. Convergence Aviation - personal jurisdiction, long-arm statute
Wallace v. DCF - administrative appeal, Medicaid benefits, abandonment
Robinson v. State - Spencer warning, pro se


©2020 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.

Subscribe to Publications

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.