Menu

Florida Appeals Court Decisions: Week of August 29 - September 2, 2022

Florida Appeals Court Decisions: Week of August 29 - September 2, 2022

Appellate & Trial Support   |   September 2, 2022
Download Download   
Share Share Page

U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

Acrylicon USA v. Silikal GMBH - trade secrets, attorney’s fees
Arrington v. Burger King - antitrust
City of North Miami Beach v. FAA - NEPA
Peden v. Stephens - appellate jurisdiction
Robinson v. Sauls - summary judgment, genuine dispute
Spring Valley Produce v. Forrest - bankruptcy discharge

Florida Supreme Court - Tallahassee

Gordon v. State - capital case, direct appeal
In re Fla R GP&JA - amended rule, new trial judges

First District Court of Appeal - Tallahassee

LSFW v. DCF - belated appeal
Stevens v. Hudson - domestic violence injunction
Grimes v. State - sentencing
Roberts v. State - appellate jurisdiction
Hughes v. State - pro se sanctions
Nesbitt v. State - mandamus, mootness
Ballard v. State - represented pro se filing

Second District Court of Appeal - Lakeland

Shenoi v. Shenoi - child support
Jappa v. Master Lessee Mezzo - eviction, hearing
Rich v. Rich - marital dissolution, fees
Shavers v. Shavers - appellate jurisdiction, mediation agreement
Taylor v. State - postconviction relief

Third District Court of Appeal - Miami

Bates v. Bates - prenuptial agreement, en banc denial
VME Group v. Grand Condo Ass’n - rehearing, trial court continuance
De Cardenas v. White Pine - new summary judgment rule, reasons required
CFLB v. Diamond Blue - unjust enrichment
Anderson v. Estate of Quintero - appellate jurisdiction, probate
Metnick v. Right of the Dot - service of process, publication
Impulsora de Productors Sustentables v. Garcia - pleading, leave to amend
Rodriguez v. US Bank - summary affirmance
Darling v. State - sentencing
Stratton v. Intoccia - Kozel, confession of error
Novick v. Mango’s Tropical Cafe - certiorari, anti-SLAPP, certified conflict
Ramirez v. State - postconviction relief

Fourth District Court of Appeal - West Palm Beach

Nat’l Claims Funding v. Sec 1st Ins - assignment of benefits
Edwards v. Alphonse - dissolution, transcript
Rosaly v. Konecny - stalking, injunction
Univ Prop v. Gurreonero - proposal for settlement, alteration

Fifth District Court of Appeal - Daytona Beach

O’Brien v. O’Brien - alimony, modification; enforcement, contempt
ProAmpac Holdings v. RCBA - personal jurisdiction
KC Qual Care v. Direct Gen Ins - dismissal, well-pled allegations  
Robinson v. State - postconviction relief


©2022 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.