31 Florida opinions name it 3 courts 1935–2019 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 |
|---|---|---|
Cowen v. Thorntongreen2 sentences2005See, e.g., Cocca v. Smith, 821 So.2d 328, 330 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Cowen v. Thornton, 621 So.2d 684, 687 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). 1995See Cowen v. Thornton, 621 So.2d 684, 687 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) ("The proper method to challenge an inadequate verdict is to file a motion for new trial."); accord Cowart v. Kendall United Methodist Church, 476 So.2d 289 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). | 2 | 2 |
Abreu-Gutierrez v. Jamesgreen2 sentences2019Id. at 266-67 . 2018The trial court denied its motion, determining that because Spuhler did not meet the criteria for commitment under section 916.13, conditional release was not available and the State's only remedy was under the Baker Act, if appropriate. "[C]ertiorari review is proper when it is alleged that the circuit court's interpretation of a statute violates clearly established law or when it fails to follow the dictates of a statute[] and the error is sufficiently egregious as to result in a miscarriage of justice." McCray v. State, 230 So. 3d 495, 497 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (quoting In re Asbestos Litig., | 1 | 2 |
McCray v. Stategreen1 sentence2018The trial court denied its motion, determining that because Spuhler did not meet the criteria for commitment under section 916.13, conditional release was not available and the State's only remedy was under the Baker Act, if appropriate. "[C]ertiorari review is proper when it is alleged that the circuit court's interpretation of a statute violates clearly established law or when it fails to follow the dictates of a statute[] and the error is sufficiently egregious as to result in a miscarriage of justice." McCray v. State, 230 So. 3d 495, 497 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (quoting In re Asbestos Litig., | 1 | 1 |
In Re Asbestos Litigationgreen1 sentence2018The trial court denied its motion, determining that because Spuhler did not meet the criteria for commitment under section 916.13, conditional release was not available and the State's only remedy was under the Baker Act, if appropriate. "[C]ertiorari review is proper when it is alleged that the circuit court's interpretation of a statute violates clearly established law or when it fails to follow the dictates of a statute[] and the error is sufficiently egregious as to result in a miscarriage of justice." McCray v. State, 230 So. 3d 495, 497 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (quoting In re Asbestos Litig., | 1 | 1 |
Laverde v. Stategreen1 sentence2016Laverde v. State, 933 So.2d 1289, 1290 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Pontius v. State, 932 So.2d 618, 619 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Scharfschwerdt v. Kanarek, 553 So.2d 218, 219 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (citing Reino v. State, 352 So.2d 853 (Fla.1977)). | 1 | 1 |
Scharfschwerdt v. Kanarekgreen1 sentence2016Laverde v. State, 933 So.2d 1289, 1290 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Pontius v. State, 932 So.2d 618, 619 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Scharfschwerdt v. Kanarek, 553 So.2d 218, 219 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (citing Reino v. State, 352 So.2d 853 (Fla.1977)). | 1 | 1 |
Pontius v. Stategreen1 sentence2016Laverde v. State, 933 So.2d 1289, 1290 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Pontius v. State, 932 So.2d 618, 619 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Scharfschwerdt v. Kanarek, 553 So.2d 218, 219 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (citing Reino v. State, 352 So.2d 853 (Fla.1977)). | 1 | 1 |
Hoffman v. WELLS FARGO BANK MINNESOTAgreen1 sentence2015See Johnson v. Office of the State Attorney, 987 So.2d 206, 208 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (citing Card v. State, 497 So.2d 1169 (Fla.1986)). | 1 | 1 |
Mederos v. Stategreen1 sentence2015Mederos v. State, 102 So.3d 7, 11 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). | 1 | 1 |
Card v. Stategreen1 sentence2015See Johnson v. Office of the State Attorney, 987 So.2d 206, 208 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (citing Card v. State, 497 So.2d 1169 (Fla.1986)). | 1 | 1 |
Florida House of Representatives v. Cristgreen1 sentence2011See, e.g., Fla. House of Reps. v. Crist, 999 So.2d 601, 607 (Fla.2008) (concluding that the Court had quo warranto jurisdiction where petitioners sought relief against the governor for exceeding his authority to unilaterally execute a gambling compact expanding casino gambling on tribal lands); Martinez, 545 So.2d at 1339 (deciding that quo warranto was the proper method to test the governor’s power to call a second special session). | 1 | 1 |
Vasquez v. Stategreen1 sentence2009Patton v. State, 712 So.2d 1206, 1207 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); see also Vasquez v. State, 496 So.2d 818, 819-20 (Fla.1986). | 1 | 1 |
Patton v. Stategreen1 sentence2009Patton v. State, 712 So.2d 1206, 1207 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); see also Vasquez v. State, 496 So.2d 818, 819-20 (Fla.1986). | 1 | 1 |
Manning v. Stategreen1 sentence2008It agreed that a petition for writ of habeas corpus was the correct method to challenge his detention according to the First District's decision in Manning v. State, 913 So.2d 37, 37 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). | 1 | 1 |
Frederick v. Stategreen1 sentence2007Collins v. State, 859 So.2d 1244, 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (citing Sheriff v. Moore, 781 So.2d 1146 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)); McLevy v. State, 787 So.2d 194 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); McLeroy v. State, 704 So.2d 151 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Leichtman v. Singletary, 674 So.2d 889 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); see also Frederick v. State, 714 So.2d 1043, 1043 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (stating "[h]abeas petitions directed to trial issues must be brought in the circuit court of the county where the trial occurred"). [2] Some of these cases cite to this court's opinion in State v. Broom, 523 So.2d 639, 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). | 1 | 1 |
Collins v. Stategreen1 sentence2007Collins v. State, 859 So.2d 1244, 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (citing Sheriff v. Moore, 781 So.2d 1146 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)); McLevy v. State, 787 So.2d 194 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); McLeroy v. State, 704 So.2d 151 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Leichtman v. Singletary, 674 So.2d 889 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); see also Frederick v. State, 714 So.2d 1043, 1043 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (stating "[h]abeas petitions directed to trial issues must be brought in the circuit court of the county where the trial occurred"). [2] Some of these cases cite to this court's opinion in State v. Broom, 523 So.2d 639, 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Broomgreen1 sentence2007Collins v. State, 859 So.2d 1244, 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (citing Sheriff v. Moore, 781 So.2d 1146 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)); McLevy v. State, 787 So.2d 194 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); McLeroy v. State, 704 So.2d 151 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Leichtman v. Singletary, 674 So.2d 889 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); see also Frederick v. State, 714 So.2d 1043, 1043 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (stating "[h]abeas petitions directed to trial issues must be brought in the circuit court of the county where the trial occurred"). [2] Some of these cases cite to this court's opinion in State v. Broom, 523 So.2d 639, 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). | 1 | 1 |
Cocca v. Smithgreen1 sentence2005See, e.g., Cocca v. Smith, 821 So.2d 328, 330 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Cowen v. Thornton, 621 So.2d 684, 687 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). | 1 | 1 |
Cowart v. Kendall United Methodist Churchgreen1 sentence1995See Cowen v. Thornton, 621 So.2d 684, 687 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) ("The proper method to challenge an inadequate verdict is to file a motion for new trial."); accord Cowart v. Kendall United Methodist Church, 476 So.2d 289 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). | 1 | 1 |
Pino v. District Court of Appeal, Third Districtgreen1 sentence1995Pino v. District Court of Appeal, Third Dist., 604 So.2d 1232, 1233 (Fla. 1992). | 1 | 1 |
| NME Properties, Inc. v. McCulloughgreen | 1 | 1 |
| McCloud v. Sherman Mobile Concrete Co., Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| Wheeler v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Winter v. Mackgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Darden v. Wainwrightgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Marcello v. United Statesgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Feldman v. United Statesred | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
NME Hospitals, Inc. v. Azzariti
green
2 sentences1994NME Properties, Inc. v. McCullough, 590 So.2d 439, 440 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); NME Hospitals, Inc. v. Azzariti, 573 So.2d 173 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Pearlstein v. Malunney, 500 So.2d 585 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), rev. denied, 511 So.2d 299 (Fla. 1987). 1991NME Hospitals, Inc. v. Azzariti, 573 So.2d 173 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). | 2 | 1991–1994 |
Reino v. State
green
1 sentence2016Laverde v. State, 933 So.2d 1289, 1290 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Pontius v. State, 932 So.2d 618, 619 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Scharfschwerdt v. Kanarek, 553 So.2d 218, 219 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (citing Reino v. State, 352 So.2d 853 (Fla.1977)). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Springer
green
1 sentence2010State v. Springer, 965 So.2d 270 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). 2 . | 1 | 2010–2010 |
McLeroy v. State
green
1 sentence2007Collins v. State, 859 So.2d 1244, 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (citing Sheriff v. Moore, 781 So.2d 1146 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)); McLevy v. State, 787 So.2d 194 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); McLeroy v. State, 704 So.2d 151 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Leichtman v. Singletary, 674 So.2d 889 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); see also Frederick v. State, 714 So.2d 1043, 1043 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (stating "[h]abeas petitions directed to trial issues must be brought in the circuit court of the county where the trial occurred"). [2] Some of these cases cite to this court's opinion in State v. Broom, 523 So.2d 639, 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
McLevy v. State
green
1 sentence2007Collins v. State, 859 So.2d 1244, 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (citing Sheriff v. Moore, 781 So.2d 1146 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)); McLevy v. State, 787 So.2d 194 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); McLeroy v. State, 704 So.2d 151 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Leichtman v. Singletary, 674 So.2d 889 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); see also Frederick v. State, 714 So.2d 1043, 1043 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (stating "[h]abeas petitions directed to trial issues must be brought in the circuit court of the county where the trial occurred"). [2] Some of these cases cite to this court's opinion in State v. Broom, 523 So.2d 639, 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Leichtman v. Singletary
green
1 sentence2007Collins v. State, 859 So.2d 1244, 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (citing Sheriff v. Moore, 781 So.2d 1146 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)); McLevy v. State, 787 So.2d 194 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); McLeroy v. State, 704 So.2d 151 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Leichtman v. Singletary, 674 So.2d 889 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); see also Frederick v. State, 714 So.2d 1043, 1043 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (stating "[h]abeas petitions directed to trial issues must be brought in the circuit court of the county where the trial occurred"). [2] Some of these cases cite to this court's opinion in State v. Broom, 523 So.2d 639, 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Sheriff v. Moore
green
1 sentence2007Collins v. State, 859 So.2d 1244, 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (citing Sheriff v. Moore, 781 So.2d 1146 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)); McLevy v. State, 787 So.2d 194 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); McLeroy v. State, 704 So.2d 151 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Leichtman v. Singletary, 674 So.2d 889 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); see also Frederick v. State, 714 So.2d 1043, 1043 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (stating "[h]abeas petitions directed to trial issues must be brought in the circuit court of the county where the trial occurred"). [2] Some of these cases cite to this court's opinion in State v. Broom, 523 So.2d 639, 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Tormey v. Moore
green
1 sentence2003Regrettably, it cannot be applied in the case now before us on account of the Florida Supreme Court's recent decision in Tormey v. Moore, 824 So.2d 137 (Fla.2002). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Reyher v. Reyher
green
1 sentence2000Reyher v. Reyher, 495 So.2d 797 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), sets forth the method of analysis *1184 for equitable distribution of pension plans: The analysis in the equitable distribution of pension plans begins with 100% ownership (i.e., beneficial interest) by one party.... | 1 | 2000–2000 |
| MIAMI PHYSICAL THERAPY v. Savage green | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Pearlstein v. Malunney
green
1 sentence1994NME Properties, Inc. v. McCullough, 590 So.2d 439, 440 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); NME Hospitals, Inc. v. Azzariti, 573 So.2d 173 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Pearlstein v. Malunney, 500 So.2d 585 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), rev. denied, 511 So.2d 299 (Fla. 1987). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
| Kennedy v. State green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| Blockburger v. United States green | 1 | 1990–1990 |
| Carawan v. State red | 1 | 1990–1990 |
| State v. Peters green | 1 | 1988–1988 |
| Pomponio v. Claridge of Pompano Condominium green | 1 | 1984–1984 |
| Diamond v. Oreamuno green | 1 | 1975–1975 |
| State Ex Rel. Trimble v. Hedman green | 1 | 1972–1972 |
| Mack v. State green | 1 | 1972–1972 |
| Depfer v. Walker green | 1 | 1958–1958 |
| Commonwealth v. Jones green | 1 | 1940–1940 |
| Harry E. Prettyman, Inc. v. Florida Real Estate Commission green | 1 | 1935–1935 |
| Florida Motor Lines, Inc. v. Railroad Commissioners green | 1 | 1935–1935 |
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.