40 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1957–2026 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahasseegreen2 sentences2023See also Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979). 2017See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150 (Fla. 1979). | 3 | 3 |
Mills v. Florida Department of Correctionsgreen2 sentences2018Elections Canvassing Bd., 204 So. 3d 571, 578 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)). “‘[T]he opportunity to be heard at an evidentiary hearing requires time to secure the attendance of witnesses and to prepare for the presentation of evidence and argument.’” Jackson, 204 So. 3d at 578 (quoting Crepage v. City of Lauderhill, 774 So. 2d 61, 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)). 2017Elections Canvassing Bd., 204 So.3d 571, 578 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (“[T]he opportunity to be heard at an evidentiary hearing requires time to secure the attendance qf witnesses and to prepare for the presentation of evidence and argument.” (quoting Crepage v. City of Lauderhill, 774 So.2d 61, 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (internal quotation and citation omitted)); see also Wildwood Props., 621 So.2d at 692 n.1 (holding that notice that the court would hear evidence provided on the day of a hearing to an attorney who was seeking to withdraw from representing a party was not adequate to comport with due | 2 | 2 |
Crepage v. City of Lauderhillgreen2 sentences2018Elections Canvassing Bd., 204 So. 3d 571, 578 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)). “‘[T]he opportunity to be heard at an evidentiary hearing requires time to secure the attendance of witnesses and to prepare for the presentation of evidence and argument.’” Jackson, 204 So. 3d at 578 (quoting Crepage v. City of Lauderhill, 774 So. 2d 61, 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)). 2017Elections Canvassing Bd., 204 So.3d 571, 578 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (“[T]he opportunity to be heard at an evidentiary hearing requires time to secure the attendance qf witnesses and to prepare for the presentation of evidence and argument.” (quoting Crepage v. City of Lauderhill, 774 So.2d 61, 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (internal quotation and citation omitted)); see also Wildwood Props., 621 So.2d at 692 n.1 (holding that notice that the court would hear evidence provided on the day of a hearing to an attorney who was seeking to withdraw from representing a party was not adequate to comport with due | 2 | 2 |
Henry Stiles, Inc. v. Evansgreen2 sentences1993See Henry Stiles, Inc. v. Evans, 206 So.2d 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968). 1986If service is to be effectuated via mail then the affidavits must be mailed sufficiently in advance so that the expiration of three days[ [1] ] from mailing will still be prior to the day of hearing. 206 So.2d at 67 . | 1 | 5 |
Cleveland Trust Company v. Fostergreen2 sentences1989The adverse party prior to the day of the hearing may serve opposing affidavits * * *." [Emphasis added.] Cleveland Trust, 93 So.2d at 114 (emphasis in original). 1967Cleveland Trust Co. v. Foster, Fla.1957, 93 So.2d 112 ; City of Tarpon Springs v. Gerecter, Fla.1963, 155 So.2d 566 . “ * * * The adverse party prior to the day of hearing may serve opposing affidavits.” Rule 1.36(c), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. | 1 | 4 |
Deshazior v. School Board of Miami-Dade County, Floridagreen2 sentences2018Bd. of Miami-Dade Cty, Fla., 217 So. 3d 151, 152 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (holding that the trial court’s decision not to consider an untimely affidavit in opposition to a motion for summary judgment was not an abuse of discretion). 2018Bd. of Miami-Dade Cty, Fla. , 217 So.3d 151 , 152 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (holding that the trial court's decision not to consider an untimely affidavit in opposition to a motion for summary judgment was not an abuse of discretion). | 1 | 2 |
Greene v. Seiglegreen2 sentences2018To the extent that summary judgment evidence has not already been filed with the court, the adverse party must serve a copy on the movant pursuant to rule 1.080 at least 5 days prior to the day of the hearing, or by delivery to the movant's attorney no later than 5:00 p.m. 2 business days prior to the day of hearing. (emphasis added). 4 745 So. 2d 411, 411 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Travelers Ins. 2018To the extent that summary judgment evidence has not already been filed with the court, the adverse party must serve a copy on the movant pursuant to rule 1.080 at least 5 days prior to the day of the hearing, or by delivery to the movant's attorney no later than 5:00 p.m. 2 business days prior to the day of hearing. (emphasis added). 4 745 So. 2d 411, 411 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Travelers Ins. | 1 | 1 |
Binford v. City of Winter Springsgreen1 sentence2017Co. v. Rogers, 580 So.2d 229 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (holding that trial court’s decision not to consider untimely affidavit in opposition to motion for summary judgment was not an abuse of discretion); Binford v. City of Winter Springs, 969 So.2d 1098, 1099 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (observing: “It is well established that an affidavit in opposition to summary judgment which is filed on the day of the summary judgment hearing is untimely and the trial court has discretion to disregard it.”) Given the absence of any genuine issue of material fact, all that remained for determination was an issue of law: | 1 | 1 |
Wildwood Properties v. Archer Vero Beachgreen1 sentence2017Elections Canvassing Bd., 204 So.3d 571, 578 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (“[T]he opportunity to be heard at an evidentiary hearing requires time to secure the attendance qf witnesses and to prepare for the presentation of evidence and argument.” (quoting Crepage v. City of Lauderhill, 774 So.2d 61, 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (internal quotation and citation omitted)); see also Wildwood Props., 621 So.2d at 692 n.1 (holding that notice that the court would hear evidence provided on the day of a hearing to an attorney who was seeking to withdraw from representing a party was not adequate to comport with due | 1 | 1 |
Henzel v. Golsteingreen1 sentence2015See Henzel v. Golstein, 349 So.2d 824, 825 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977) (holding that, twenty-four hours’ notice of a hearing on a motion to dismiss was inadequate); Fla. R. | 1 | 1 |
Tillman v. Stategreen1 sentence2013Ass’n. v. Robbins, 914 So.2d 925, 928 (Fla.2005) (quoting Tillman v. State, 471 So.2d 32, 85 (Fla.1985)). | 1 | 1 |
Sunset Harbour Condo. Ass'n v. Robbinsgreen1 sentence2013Ass’n. v. Robbins, 914 So.2d 925, 928 (Fla.2005) (quoting Tillman v. State, 471 So.2d 32, 85 (Fla.1985)). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Lainegreen1 sentence2008A crime of this nature, if subtly encouraged by failure to condemn and punish, certainly leads down the road to totalitarianism. 364 U.S. at 220 n. 8, 80 S.Ct. 1437 (emphasis supplied) (quoting FBI Law Enforcement Bull., Sept. 1952, at 1-2). [22] The State charged Mr. Wyche with burglary of a structure (section 810.02, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count I), third-degree grand theft (section 812.014(2)(c)1., Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count II), and criminal mischief (section 806.13, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count III). [23] Ten business days not including the day on which defense counsel submitte | 1 | 1 |
| United States v. Lindoine Sanchez-Jaramillo, United States of America v. Enrique Cruz-Almadagreen | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Richard Lawrence Wellinsgreen1 sentence2008A crime of this nature, if subtly encouraged by failure to condemn and punish, certainly leads down the road to totalitarianism. 364 U.S. at 220 n. 8, 80 S.Ct. 1437 (emphasis supplied) (quoting FBI Law Enforcement Bull., Sept. 1952, at 1-2). [22] The State charged Mr. Wyche with burglary of a structure (section 810.02, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count I), third-degree grand theft (section 812.014(2)(c)1., Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count II), and criminal mischief (section 806.13, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count III). [23] Ten business days not including the day on which defense counsel submitte | 1 | 1 |
United States v. David T. Lace, Roger R. Ducharme, Gary D. Butts, Patricia Eckman, and Glenn Pollackgreen1 sentence2008A crime of this nature, if subtly encouraged by failure to condemn and punish, certainly leads down the road to totalitarianism. 364 U.S. at 220 n. 8, 80 S.Ct. 1437 (emphasis supplied) (quoting FBI Law Enforcement Bull., Sept. 1952, at 1-2). [22] The State charged Mr. Wyche with burglary of a structure (section 810.02, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count I), third-degree grand theft (section 812.014(2)(c)1., Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count II), and criminal mischief (section 806.13, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count III). [23] Ten business days not including the day on which defense counsel submitte | 1 | 1 |
Vizbaras v. Priebergreen1 sentence2008A crime of this nature, if subtly encouraged by failure to condemn and punish, certainly leads down the road to totalitarianism. 364 U.S. at 220 n. 8, 80 S.Ct. 1437 (emphasis supplied) (quoting FBI Law Enforcement Bull., Sept. 1952, at 1-2). [22] The State charged Mr. Wyche with burglary of a structure (section 810.02, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count I), third-degree grand theft (section 812.014(2)(c)1., Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count II), and criminal mischief (section 806.13, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count III). [23] Ten business days not including the day on which defense counsel submitte | 1 | 1 |
United States v. David Buchanangreen1 sentence2008A crime of this nature, if subtly encouraged by failure to condemn and punish, certainly leads down the road to totalitarianism. 364 U.S. at 220 n. 8, 80 S.Ct. 1437 (emphasis supplied) (quoting FBI Law Enforcement Bull., Sept. 1952, at 1-2). [22] The State charged Mr. Wyche with burglary of a structure (section 810.02, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count I), third-degree grand theft (section 812.014(2)(c)1., Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count II), and criminal mischief (section 806.13, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count III). [23] Ten business days not including the day on which defense counsel submitte | 1 | 1 |
Donald Leroy Brown v. Joseph R. Brierleygreen1 sentence2008A crime of this nature, if subtly encouraged by failure to condemn and punish, certainly leads down the road to totalitarianism. 364 U.S. at 220 n. 8, 80 S.Ct. 1437 (emphasis supplied) (quoting FBI Law Enforcement Bull., Sept. 1952, at 1-2). [22] The State charged Mr. Wyche with burglary of a structure (section 810.02, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count I), third-degree grand theft (section 812.014(2)(c)1., Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count II), and criminal mischief (section 806.13, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count III). [23] Ten business days not including the day on which defense counsel submitte | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Esquivelgreen1 sentence2008A crime of this nature, if subtly encouraged by failure to condemn and punish, certainly leads down the road to totalitarianism. 364 U.S. at 220 n. 8, 80 S.Ct. 1437 (emphasis supplied) (quoting FBI Law Enforcement Bull., Sept. 1952, at 1-2). [22] The State charged Mr. Wyche with burglary of a structure (section 810.02, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count I), third-degree grand theft (section 812.014(2)(c)1., Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count II), and criminal mischief (section 806.13, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count III). [23] Ten business days not including the day on which defense counsel submitte | 1 | 1 |
| Saunders v. UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COM'Ngreen | 1 | 1 |
| Ash v. FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COM'Ngreen | 1 | 1 |
| Thomas v. United Parcel Service, Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| Riveras v. UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COM'Ngreen | 1 | 1 |
| FLA. HIGH SCHOOL ACTIVITIES v. Benitezgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Buckley Towers Condominium, Inc. v. Buchwaldgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Padgett v. First Federal S & L Ass'ngreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Key Biscayne Council v. State, Department of Natural Resources
green
2 sentences1998Key Biscayne Council v. State, Dept. of Natural Resources, 579 So.2d 293 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). 1997Key Biscayne Council v. State, Dept. of Natural Resources, 579 So.2d 293 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). | 2 | 1997–1998 |
Hardcastle v. Mobley
green
2 sentences1992The trial judge followed the law and should not be reversed for doing so. [1] See Silva v. Hernandez, 595 So.2d 230 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992), juris. accepted, 604 So.2d 487 (Fla. 1992); Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Gillette, 519 So.2d 1059 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), dis'm. granted, 529 So.2d 694 (Fla. 1988); Zamora v. Blue Coast Corp., 348 So.2d 1165 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), cert. denied, 359 So.2d 1222 (Fla. 1978); Auerback v. Alto, 281 So.2d 567 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973), cert. denied, 297 So.2d 31 (Fla. 1974); Henry Stiles, Inc. v. Evans, 206 So.2d 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968); and Hardcastle v. Mobley, 143 So.2 1973RCP 1.510(c), 31 F.S.A.; Cleveland Trust Company v. Foster, Fla. 1957, 93 So.2d 112 ; Siciliano v. Hunerberg, Fla. App. 1961, 135 So.2d 750 ; Hardcastle v. Mobley, Fla.App. 1962, 143 So.2d 715 ; Henry Stiles, Inc. v. Evans, Fla.App. 1968, 206 So.2d 65 . | 2 | 1973–1992 |
NORTH MIAMI GEN. HOSP. INC. v. Plaza
green
2 sentences1987In North Miami General Hospital, Inc. v. Plaza, 432 So.2d 723 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), the court held that a respiratory therapist who worked for the hospital only when she wanted to was not eligible for unemployment compensation benefits. 1987In North Miami General Hospital, Inc. v. Plaza, 432 So.2d 723 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), the court held that a respiratory therapist who worked for the hospital only when she wanted to was not eligible for unemployment compensation benefits. | 2 | 1987–1987 |
Siciliano v. Hunerberg
green
2 sentences1973RCP 1.510(c), 31 F.S.A.; Cleveland Trust Company v. Foster, Fla. 1957, 93 So.2d 112 ; Siciliano v. Hunerberg, Fla. App. 1961, 135 So.2d 750 ; Hardcastle v. Mobley, Fla.App. 1962, 143 So.2d 715 ; Henry Stiles, Inc. v. Evans, Fla.App. 1968, 206 So.2d 65 . 1962Herring v. Eiland, Fla. 1955, 81 So.2d 645 ; Pritchard v. Peppercorn and Peppercorn, Inc., Fla. 1957, 96 So.2d 769 . (4) And, lastly, both the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure and the cases interpreting these rules have made it mandatory that affidavits in opposition to motions for summary judgment must be filed prior to the day of hearing. 1.36(c), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, 30 F.S.A.; Cleveland Trust Company v. Foster, Fla. 1957, 93 So.2d 112 ; Siciliano v. Hunerberg, Fla.App. 1961, 135 So.2d 750 . | 2 | 1962–1973 |
Binger v. King Pest Control
green
1 sentence2026The court had already set aside a day for the hearing, and there was no indication from the record 10 that if there wasn't enough time to accommodate Mr. Beltran's live testimony a continuance of the hearing couldn't have been convened.4 In Binger v. King Pest Control, 401 So. 2d 1310 (Fla. 1981), the supreme court provided guidance when considering a pretrial failure to disclose a witness at trial. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Messing v. Nieradka
green
1 sentence2018“Blindsiding a party by announcing on the day of the hearing that the court will entertain evidence at a hearing not noticed as an evidentiary hearing is the epitome of a due process violation.” Messing v. Nieradka, 230 So. 3d 962 , (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (citing Jackson v. Leon Cty. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Independent Fire Insurance Co. v. Rogers
neutral
1 sentence2017Co. v. Rogers, 580 So.2d 229 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (holding that trial court’s decision not to consider untimely affidavit in opposition to motion for summary judgment was not an abuse of discretion); Binford v. City of Winter Springs, 969 So.2d 1098, 1099 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (observing: “It is well established that an affidavit in opposition to summary judgment which is filed on the day of the summary judgment hearing is untimely and the trial court has discretion to disregard it.”) Given the absence of any genuine issue of material fact, all that remained for determination was an issue of law: | 1 | 2017–2017 |
BEVERLY HEALTH & REHAB. SERVS. v. Meeks
green
1 sentence2017Id. at 324 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Goldstein v. Wortmann
green
1 sentence2012Accordingly, appellant had until 5:00 p.m. on March 18 to deliver the affidavit.” Id. at 397 . | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Elkins v. United States
green
2 sentences2008A crime of this nature, if subtly encouraged by failure to condemn and punish, certainly leads down the road to totalitarianism. 364 U.S. at 220 n. 8, 80 S.Ct. 1437 (emphasis supplied) (quoting FBI Law Enforcement Bull., Sept. 1952, at 1-2). [22] The State charged Mr. Wyche with burglary of a structure (section 810.02, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count I), third-degree grand theft (section 812.014(2)(c)1., Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count II), and criminal mischief (section 806.13, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count III). [23] Ten business days not including the day on which defense counsel submitte 2008A crime of this nature, if subtly encouraged by failure to condemn and punish, certainly leads down the road to totalitarianism. 364 U.S. at 220 n. 8, 80 S.Ct. 1437 (emphasis supplied) (quoting FBI Law Enforcement Bull., Sept. 1952, at 1-2). [22] The State charged Mr. Wyche with burglary of a structure (section 810.02, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count I), third-degree grand theft (section 812.014(2)(c)1., Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count II), and criminal mischief (section 806.13, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count III). [23] Ten business days not including the day on which defense counsel submitte | 1 | 2008–2008 |
United States v. Jerry Smith
green
1 sentence2008A crime of this nature, if subtly encouraged by failure to condemn and punish, certainly leads down the road to totalitarianism. 364 U.S. at 220 n. 8, 80 S.Ct. 1437 (emphasis supplied) (quoting FBI Law Enforcement Bull., Sept. 1952, at 1-2). [22] The State charged Mr. Wyche with burglary of a structure (section 810.02, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count I), third-degree grand theft (section 812.014(2)(c)1., Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count II), and criminal mischief (section 806.13, Florida Statutes (2001)) (Count III). [23] Ten business days not including the day on which defense counsel submitte | 1 | 2008–2008 |
| Volkswagen of America, Inc. v. Gentry green | 1 | 2007–2007 |
| Taylor v. TR Properties, Inc. green | 1 | 2003–2003 |
| Pecora v. Pecora green | 1 | 2003–2003 |
| Lamb v. State green | 1 | 1998–1998 |
| Rosen v. Rosen green | 1 | 1997–1997 |
| DEPT. OF H. & R. SERV. v. Chambers green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| Auerbach v. Alto green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. v. Gillette green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| Arias v. Urban green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| Auerbach v. Alto green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| Zamora v. Blue Coast Corp. neutral | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| Von Zamft v. South Fla. Water Management Dist. green | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| Miami Transit Company v. Ford green | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| Burns v. Taylor neutral | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| Davanzo v. Miami National Bank green | 1 | 1983–1983 |
| Scocozzo v. General Development Corporation green | 1 | 1983–1983 |
| Fote v. Reitano green | 1 | 1983–1983 |
| Folz v. Beard green | 1 | 1983–1983 |
| Ferris v. Nichols green | 1 | 1978–1978 |
| Brooks v. INTERLACHEN LAKES ESTATES neutral | 1 | 1977–1977 |
| Ser-Nestler, Inc. v. General Finance Loan Company of Miami Northwest green | 1 | 1968–1968 |
| City of Tarpon Springs v. Gerecter neutral | 1 | 1967–1967 |
| Crovella v. Cochrane green | 1 | 1963–1963 |
| Herring v. Eiland green | 1 | 1962–1962 |
| Pritchard v. Peppercorn and Peppercorn, Inc. green | 1 | 1962–1962 |
| Cook v. Navy Point, Inc. green | 1 | 1957–1957 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.