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.
20 Florida opinions name it 3 courts 1931–2013 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 |
|---|---|---|
Sansone v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1981See also Sansone v. United States, 380 U.S. 343 , 85 S.Ct. 1004 , 13 L.Ed.2d 882 (1965). .Anomalously, the jury need not be instructed on the penalty provisions of lesser-included of fenses. 1981See also Sansone v. United States, 380 U.S. 343 , 85 S.Ct. 1004 , 13 L.Ed.2d 882 (1965). .Anomalously, the jury need not be instructed on the penalty provisions of lesser-included of fenses. | 2 | 2 |
Scherk v. Alberto-Culver Co.green2 sentences1986Under those types of circumstances, the clause is unenforceable only "if the inclusion of that clause in the contract was the product of fraud or coercion." Scherk v. Alberto-Culver Co., 417 U.S. 506 , 519 n. 14, 94 S.Ct. 2449 , 2457 n. 14, 41 L.Ed.2d 270 , 281 n. 14 (1974) (emphasis by the Supreme Court). 1986Under those types of circumstances, the clause is unenforceable only "if the inclusion of that clause in the contract was the product of fraud or coercion." Scherk v. Alberto-Culver Co., 417 U.S. 506 , 519 n. 14, 94 S.Ct. 2449 , 2457 n. 14, 41 L.Ed.2d 270 , 281 n. 14 (1974) (emphasis by the Supreme Court). | 1 | 2 |
Bauer v. Stategreen2 sentences2013As noted in Bauer v. State, 96 So.3d 1063, 1067-68 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012), the legislature’s inclusion of the requirement that the material be relevant to the deviant behavior pattern reflects its “recognition that, under certain circumstances, a defendant’s viewing, owning, or possessing of obscene, pornographic, or sexually stimulating visual or auditory material would not be ‘relevant.’ ” For the State to meet its burden for revocation of probation for violation of this condition, it may be necessary in some instances to present expert testimony. 2013Id. at 1068-69 ; Sellers, 16 So.3d at 227 . | 1 | 1 |
Golden Palm Hospitality, Inc. v. STEARNS BANK NATL. ASS'Ngreen1 sentence2012Group, Inc., 801 So.2d 131, 135 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (noting that in order to void a forum selection clause for fraud, one must show that the clause itself is the product of fraud or that alternatively, “[t]he fraud complained of must relate to the inclusion of the clause in the contract.’ ”) (citation omitted); Golden Palm Hospitality, Inc. v. Steams Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 874 So.2d 1231, 1235 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) (same). | 1 | 1 |
Bombardier Capital Inc. v. Progressive Marketing Group, Inc.green1 sentence2012Group, Inc., 801 So.2d 131, 135 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (noting that in order to void a forum selection clause for fraud, one must show that the clause itself is the product of fraud or that alternatively, “[t]he fraud complained of must relate to the inclusion of the clause in the contract.’ ”) (citation omitted); Golden Palm Hospitality, Inc. v. Steams Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 874 So.2d 1231, 1235 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) (same). | 1 | 1 |
First Pacific Corp. v. Sociedade De Empreendimentos E Construcoes, Ltda.green1 sentence2001Corp. v. Sociedade de Empreendimentos e Construcoes, LTDA., 566 So.2d 3, 4 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). | 1 | 1 |
Lucas v. Stategreen1 sentence1997See, e.g., Lucas v. State, 613 So.2d 408, 410 (Fla. 1992), cert, denied, 510 U.S. 845 , 114 S.Ct. 136 , 126 L.Ed.2d 99 (1993), holding that a trial court’s finding of fact on a mitigator in a capital case is presumed correct. | 1 | 1 |
McGough v. United Statesgreen1 sentence1997See, e.g., Lucas v. State, 613 So.2d 408, 410 (Fla. 1992), cert, denied, 510 U.S. 845 , 114 S.Ct. 136 , 126 L.Ed.2d 99 (1993), holding that a trial court’s finding of fact on a mitigator in a capital case is presumed correct. | 1 | 1 |
Palmetto Guano Corp. v. McCormickgreen1 sentence1997See, e.g., Lucas v. State, 613 So.2d 408, 410 (Fla. 1992), cert, denied, 510 U.S. 845 , 114 S.Ct. 136 , 126 L.Ed.2d 99 (1993), holding that a trial court’s finding of fact on a mitigator in a capital case is presumed correct. | 1 | 1 |
Sunrise Medical Group, P.A. v. Propstgreen1 sentence1986Consequently, we do not believe the inclusion of the hearing requirement in Rule 1.490(h) was inadvertent. 430 So.2d at 533 (footnote omitted). | 1 | 1 |
In Re Florida Rules of Criminal Proceduregreen1 sentence1984The committee recognized that a legislative act could well be unpopular with the Legislature and not enacted, and recommended the inclusion in the rule." See, In re Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, 196 So.2d 124 at p. 155 (Fla. 1967). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Haislip v. State
neutral
2 sentences1981We consider the inclusion of the penalty instruction in this rule to be as fortuitous as the inclusion of the requirement that the court instruct the jury as to the degrees of the offense found in separate Rule 3.490 under Section XI pertaining to The Verdict. .On at least five recent occasions, the Fifth District has certified the following question to the Florida Supreme Court: “Can an appellate court apply the harmless error doctrine, Section 924.33 and Section 59.041, Florida Statutes (1979), to the failure of a trial court to give the jury instruction required by Florida Rule of Criminal 1981We consider the inclusion of the penalty instruction in this rule to be as fortuitous as the inclusion of the requirement that the court instruct the jury as to the degrees of the offense found in separate Rule 3.490 under Section XI pertaining to The Verdict. [7] On at least five recent occasions, the Fifth District has certified the following question to the Florida Supreme Court: "Can an appellate court apply the harmless error doctrine, Section 924.33 and Section 59.041, Florida Statutes (1979), to the failure of a trial court to give the jury instruction required by Florida Rule of Crimin | 2 | 1981–1981 |
Gee v. State
neutral
2 sentences1981We consider the inclusion of the penalty instruction in this rule to be as fortuitous as the inclusion of the requirement that the court instruct the jury as to the degrees of the offense found in separate Rule 3.490 under Section XI pertaining to The Verdict. .On at least five recent occasions, the Fifth District has certified the following question to the Florida Supreme Court: “Can an appellate court apply the harmless error doctrine, Section 924.33 and Section 59.041, Florida Statutes (1979), to the failure of a trial court to give the jury instruction required by Florida Rule of Criminal 1981We consider the inclusion of the penalty instruction in this rule to be as fortuitous as the inclusion of the requirement that the court instruct the jury as to the degrees of the offense found in separate Rule 3.490 under Section XI pertaining to The Verdict. [7] On at least five recent occasions, the Fifth District has certified the following question to the Florida Supreme Court: "Can an appellate court apply the harmless error doctrine, Section 924.33 and Section 59.041, Florida Statutes (1979), to the failure of a trial court to give the jury instruction required by Florida Rule of Crimin | 2 | 1981–1981 |
State v. Breedlove
green
2 sentences1981We consider the inclusion of the penalty instruction in this rule to be as fortuitous as the inclusion of the requirement that the court instruct the jury as to the degrees of the offense found in separate Rule 3.490 under Section XI pertaining to The Verdict. .On at least five recent occasions, the Fifth District has certified the following question to the Florida Supreme Court: “Can an appellate court apply the harmless error doctrine, Section 924.33 and Section 59.041, Florida Statutes (1979), to the failure of a trial court to give the jury instruction required by Florida Rule of Criminal 1981We consider the inclusion of the penalty instruction in this rule to be as fortuitous as the inclusion of the requirement that the court instruct the jury as to the degrees of the offense found in separate Rule 3.490 under Section XI pertaining to The Verdict. [7] On at least five recent occasions, the Fifth District has certified the following question to the Florida Supreme Court: "Can an appellate court apply the harmless error doctrine, Section 924.33 and Section 59.041, Florida Statutes (1979), to the failure of a trial court to give the jury instruction required by Florida Rule of Crimin | 2 | 1981–1981 |
Johnson v. State
neutral
2 sentences1981We consider the inclusion of the penalty instruction in this rule to be as fortuitous as the inclusion of the requirement that the court instruct the jury as to the degrees of the offense found in separate Rule 3.490 under Section XI pertaining to The Verdict. .On at least five recent occasions, the Fifth District has certified the following question to the Florida Supreme Court: “Can an appellate court apply the harmless error doctrine, Section 924.33 and Section 59.041, Florida Statutes (1979), to the failure of a trial court to give the jury instruction required by Florida Rule of Criminal 1981We consider the inclusion of the penalty instruction in this rule to be as fortuitous as the inclusion of the requirement that the court instruct the jury as to the degrees of the offense found in separate Rule 3.490 under Section XI pertaining to The Verdict. [7] On at least five recent occasions, the Fifth District has certified the following question to the Florida Supreme Court: "Can an appellate court apply the harmless error doctrine, Section 924.33 and Section 59.041, Florida Statutes (1979), to the failure of a trial court to give the jury instruction required by Florida Rule of Crimin | 2 | 1981–1981 |
Sellers v. State
green
1 sentence2013Id. at 1068-69 ; Sellers, 16 So.3d at 227 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Ramos v. Univision Holdings, Inc.
green
1 sentence2004In Ramos v. Univision Holdings, Inc., 655 So.2d 89 (Fla.1995), we instructed: A district court is generally without jurisdiction to review a nonfinal order denying a motion for summary judgment. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Washington v. State
green
1 sentence2004Bombardier; Holder, 576 So.2d at 974 ; First Pac. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
State v. Lasley
neutral
1 sentence1992In State v. Lasley, 507 So.2d 711 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), the court noted that, "[l]ike a habeas corpus proceeding an action under rule 3.850 is considered civil in nature and collateral to the criminal prosecution which resulted in the judgment of conviction, notwithstanding the inclusion of rule 3.850 within the criminal rules." As for the question of timeliness, our supreme court has recently stated, referring to amended rule 3.850 motions, that "the two-year limitation does not preclude the enlargement of issues raised in a timely-filed first motion for post-conviction relief." Brown v. State, | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Brown v. State
green
1 sentence1992In State v. Lasley, 507 So.2d 711 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), the court noted that, "[l]ike a habeas corpus proceeding an action under rule 3.850 is considered civil in nature and collateral to the criminal prosecution which resulted in the judgment of conviction, notwithstanding the inclusion of rule 3.850 within the criminal rules." As for the question of timeliness, our supreme court has recently stated, referring to amended rule 3.850 motions, that "the two-year limitation does not preclude the enlargement of issues raised in a timely-filed first motion for post-conviction relief." Brown v. State, | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Lemus v. State
green
1 sentence1992In State v. Lasley, 507 So.2d 711 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), the court noted that, "[l]ike a habeas corpus proceeding an action under rule 3.850 is considered civil in nature and collateral to the criminal prosecution which resulted in the judgment of conviction, notwithstanding the inclusion of rule 3.850 within the criminal rules." As for the question of timeliness, our supreme court has recently stated, referring to amended rule 3.850 motions, that "the two-year limitation does not preclude the enlargement of issues raised in a timely-filed first motion for post-conviction relief." Brown v. State, | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Tolar v. State
green
1 sentence1987Green v. State, 280 So.2d 701 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973); Tolar v. State, 196 So.2d 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967); Lett v. State, 195 So.2d 608 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Lett v. State
neutral
1 sentence1987Green v. State, 280 So.2d 701 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973); Tolar v. State, 196 So.2d 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967); Lett v. State, 195 So.2d 608 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Green v. State
green
1 sentence1987Green v. State, 280 So.2d 701 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973); Tolar v. State, 196 So.2d 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967); Lett v. State, 195 So.2d 608 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Berk v. Berk
green
1 sentence1983Consequently, we do not believe the inclusion of the hearing requirement in Rule 1.490(h) was inadvertent. [3] As this court indicated in Berk v. Berk, 423 So.2d 1018 (4th DCA, 1982), adherence to Rule 1.490 procedures is required. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
LANDERS CONST. v. Delauder
green
1 sentence1982A claim for temporary total disability benefits following certain requested surgery has been held to be part of a claimant's essential medical care, and as such not to disqualify an award of attorney's fees under Section 440.34(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1979). [1] As we stated in Landers Construction v. Delauder, 417 So.2d 989 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981): The inclusion of a claim for "continuing temporary total disability benefits after said surgery" is part of claimant's essential medical care and does not disqualify the claim under Section 440.34(2)(a). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Shoultz v. State
green
1 sentence1975We suggest, however, that the pamphlet herein considered should be modified to eliminate this admonition in order that future criticism may be avoided, for we cling to the view that upon appropriate occasions a trier of fact might be justified in propounding a question." ( 106 So.2d at 425-426 ) Thus, the Supreme Court has taken a strong position against an across-the-board prohibition on questioning by jurors. | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Northern Assurance Co. v. Hotchkiss
neutral
2 sentences1933Though the Kansas case above cited is perhaps the strongest case in their favor which is cited by appellants, they also cite, in support of the same principle of construction, several cases involving bonds containing somewhat similar clauses, among them being Northern Assurance Company of England v. Hotchkiss, 90 Wis. 415 , 63 N. W. 1020 ; State v. U. S. F. & G. 1933Though the Kansas case above cited is perhaps the strongest case in their favor which is cited by appellants, they also cite, in support of the same principle of construction, several cases involving bonds containing somewhat similar clauses, among them being Northern Assurance Company of England v. Hotchkiss, 90 Wis. 415 , 63 N. W. 1020 ; State v. U. S. F. & G. | 1 | 1933–1933 |
Ellas Investment Co. v. Nobles
green
2 sentences1932Ellas Investment Co. v. Nobles, 102 Fla. 475 , 135 Sou. 1932Ellas Investment Co. v. Nobles, 102 Fla. 475 , 135 Sou. | 1 | 1932–1932 |
Seymour Opera House Co. v. Thurston
neutral
1 sentence1931As was said in an early Texas case, Seymour Opera House Co., v. Thurston, 18 Tex. Civ. | 1 | 1931–1931 |
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.