Sanchez v. Dade Cnty. Sch. Bd., 889 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 2004). · Go Syfert
Search
Sanchez v. Dade Cnty. Sch. Bd., 889 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 2004). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
7 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: ARTHUR SAGER v. MADALINA BLANCO AND RICARDO F. BLANCO (fladistctapp, 2022-10-12)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" ARTHUR SAGER v. MADALINA BLANCO AND RICARDO F. BLANCO
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
See Sun State Ford, Inc. v. Burch, 889 So. 2d 778, 778 (Fla. 2004) (determining “there is no actual conflict” where petitioner’s brief asserted conflict between Burch and Sun Chevrolet, Caetano, and Orefice). 14 In this case, the parties sharply dispute foreseeability, and the facts have not yet been crystalized in the proceedings below.
discussed Cited "see" ARTHUR SAGER v. MADALINA BLANCO AND RICARDO F. BLANCO
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
See Sun State Ford, Inc. v. Burch, 889 So. 2d 778, 778 (Fla. 2004) (determining “there is no actual conflict” between Burch and Sun Chevrolet). 14 Vehicles § 41:8. (2021) (“The question of foreseeability has been held to be a question of fact to be decided by the jury.”).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Caridad SANCHEZ
v.
DADE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD
No. SC01-1346.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Dec 2, 2004.
889 So. 2d 778
Dorothy F. Easley, Coral Gables, FL, and Jon M. Herskowitz and Jack Her-skowitz of the Herskowitz Law Firm, Miami, FL, for Petitioner., Jeffrey A. Mowers and Cindy J. Mish-con of Pyszka, Blackmon, Levy, Mowers and Kelley, Miami Lakes, FL, for Respondent.
Anstead, Bell, Cantero, Lewis, Pariente, Quince, Wells.
Published
PER CURIAM.

We originally accepted jurisdiction to review Sanchez v. Dade County School Board, 784 So.2d 1172 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001), pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3), of the Florida Constitution. After further consideration, we have determined that jurisdiction was improvidently granted.

Accordingly, this case is hereby dismissed.

It is so ordered.

PARIENTE, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur. LEWIS, J., dissents.