Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Florida opinions name it 1 courts 1994–2015 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Vasquez v. PROVINCIAL SOUTH INC.green2 sentences2015Vasquez v. Provincial S., Inc., 795 So. 2d 216, 218 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) ("Florida favors access to the courts and has interpreted section 57.105 to provide a remedy only where the plaintiff's complaint is completely untenable. 2015Vasquez v. Provincial S., Inc., 795 So.2d 216, 218 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (“Florida favors access to the courts and has interpreted section 57.105 to provide a remedy only where the plaintiffs complaint is completely untenable. | 2 | 2 |
Barber v. OAKHILLS ESTATESgreen2 sentences1996See Barber v. Oakhills Estates Partnership, 583 So.2d 1114 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). 1994See Barber v. Oakhills Estates Partnership, 583 So.2d 1114 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). | 2 | 2 |
Huie v. DENT & COOK, PAgreen1 sentence1996Because the instant attorney's fee order is identical to that precluded by Winkelman , it is not ripe for appellate review. *861 We note, however, in remanding this order pertaining to attorney's fees that due consideration be given to the following holding of Huie v. Dent & Cook, 635 So.2d 111, 112-13 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994): In light of Florida's strong policies favoring access to the courts, we have interpreted section 57.105 to provide a remedy only in cases in which the plaintiff's complaint is completely untenable. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Read v. Taylor
green
1 sentence2006As stated in Read , "Florida favors access to the courts and has interpreted section 57.105 to provide a remedy only where the plaintiff's complaint is completely untenable." Id. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Boyce v. Cluett
green
1 sentence1998This court has recognized the importance of our constitutional right of access to the courts in regard to a similar fee shifting statute, section 57.105, observing in Boyce v. Cluett, 672 So.2d 858 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996): In light of Florida's strong policies favoring access to the courts, we have interpreted section 57.105 to provide a remedy only in cases in which the plaintiff's complaint is completely untenable. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
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.