19 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1993–2024 6 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 |
|---|---|---|
CORPORATION v. Village of North Palm Beachgreen2 sentences2022Corp. v. Vill. of N. Palm Beach, 302 So. 2d 130, 131 (Fla. 1974)). 2020Corp. v. Village of N. Palm Beach, 302 So. 2d 130, 131 (Fla. 1974); see also Philip J. | 2 | 2 |
Brandenburg v. Ohiogreen2 sentences1994See also Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 , 89 S.Ct. 1827 (overturning conviction under criminal syndicalism statute for conduct and speech at Ku Klux Klan rally). 1994See also Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 , 89 S.Ct. 1827 (overturning conviction under criminal syndicalism statute for conduct and speech at Ku Klux Klan rally). | 2 | 2 |
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of Catrettgreen2 sentences2024However, the Florida Supreme Court, in adopting this amendment, reaffirmed “the bedrock principle that summary judgment is not a substitute for the trial of disputed fact issues.” Id. 2023However, the Florida Supreme Court, in adopting this amendment, reaffirmed “the bedrock principle that summary judgment is not a substitute for the trial of disputed fact issues.” Id. | 1 | 4 |
Walker v. Stategreen1 sentence2019Walker, 707 So. 2d at 319 (some alterations in original). | 1 | 1 |
Thomas v. Rollinsgreen1 sentence2013As this Court noted long ago, “a court may not properly go beyond the four corners of the allegations of the complaint when considering a motion to dismiss it.” Thomas v. Rollins, 298 So.2d 186, 187 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974) (Boyer, J.). | 1 | 1 |
Hapney v. Central Garage, Inc.green2 sentences2003As we stated in Hapney v. Central Garage, Inc., 579 So.2d 127, 131 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), [2] A plain reading of section 542.33(2)(a) dispels any notion that the legislature intended to dispense with the bedrock requirement that covenants of this nature must relate to a legitimate business interest of the employer in order to restrict or impinge upon the right to pursue and earn a living guaranteed by our constitution. 2003The Hapney court held that the existence of a legitimate business interest of the employer that required protection was a condition precedent to the validity of a noncompete covenant. 579 So.2d at 134 . | 1 | 1 |
Brooks v. Owensgreen1 sentence2001See Martin-Johnson, Inc. v. Savage, 509 So.2d 1097, 1099 (Fla.1987); Brooks v. Owens, 97 So.2d 693, 695 (Fla.1957); Kilgore v. Bird, 149 Fla. 570 , 6 So.2d 541, 545 (1942). | 1 | 1 |
Kilgore v. Birdgreen2 sentences2001See Martin-Johnson, Inc. v. Savage, 509 So.2d 1097, 1099 (Fla.1987); Brooks v. Owens, 97 So.2d 693, 695 (Fla.1957); Kilgore v. Bird, 149 Fla. 570 , 6 So.2d 541, 545 (1942). 2001See Martin-Johnson, Inc. v. Savage, 509 So.2d 1097, 1099 (Fla.1987); Brooks v. Owens, 97 So.2d 693, 695 (Fla.1957); Kilgore v. Bird, 149 Fla. 570 , 6 So.2d 541, 545 (1942). | 1 | 1 |
Martin-Johnson, Inc. v. Savagegreen1 sentence2001See Martin-Johnson, Inc. v. Savage, 509 So.2d 1097, 1099 (Fla.1987); Brooks v. Owens, 97 So.2d 693, 695 (Fla.1957); Kilgore v. Bird, 149 Fla. 570 , 6 So.2d 541, 545 (1942). | 1 | 1 |
Sarasota County v. Andrewsgreen1 sentence1995See also Sarasota County v. Andrews, 573 So.2d 113, 115 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) ( Pomponio "specifies that the bedrock of its analysis is the principle that virtually no degree of impairment will be allowed.") (emphasis in original). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Lambert v. California
green
2 sentences2021Yet, in an extraordinarily rare occurrence for this Court, we are declaring a summary to be misleading even though it accurately describes the effect of the amendment using the same operative - 30 - language as used in the amendment itself. 6 The majority reasons that the summary is misleading because it fails to explain that adult use of marijuana is not permitted under federal law and that the proposed Florida constitutional law change would not alter the federal Controlled Substances Act—contrary to the bedrock principle that citizens are presumed to know what constitutes a federal crime, s 2021Yet, in an extraordinarily rare occurrence for this Court, we are declaring a summary to be misleading even though it accurately describes the effect of the amendment using the same operative - 30 - language as used in the amendment itself. 6 The majority reasons that the summary is misleading because it fails to explain that adult use of marijuana is not permitted under federal law and that the proposed Florida constitutional law change would not alter the federal Controlled Substances Act—contrary to the bedrock principle that citizens are presumed to know what constitutes a federal crime, s | 2 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Barnum
green
2 sentences2011CONCLUSIONS “That the government must prove each element of a criminal offense beyond a reasonable doubt is a bedrock principle of our criminal justice system and one that guides the review of any criminal conviction in this state.” Barnum, 921 So.2d at 519 . 2011CONCLUSIONS "That the government must prove each element of a criminal offense beyond a reasonable doubt is a bedrock principle of our criminal justice system and one that guides the review of any criminal conviction in this state." Barnum, 921 So.2d at 519 . | 2 | 2011–2011 |
Texas v. Johnson
green
2 sentences1994Similarly, but more recently, overturning a conviction for flag desecration, the Court has said that “[i]f there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.” Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. at 414 , 109 S.Ct. at 2545 . 1994Similarly, but more recently, overturning a conviction for flag desecration, the Court has said that “[i]f there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.” Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. at 414 , 109 S.Ct. at 2545 . | 2 | 1994–1994 |
Robertson v. State
green
1 sentence2013For example, “[notwithstanding this principle ‘[i]n some circumstances, even though a trial court’s ruling is based on improper reasoning, the ruling will be upheld if there is any theory or principle of law in the record which would support the ruling.’ ” Robertson, 829 So.2d at 906 (quoting Radio Station WQBA, 731 So.2d at 644 ). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Dade Cty. Sch. Bd. v. Radio Station WQBA
green
1 sentence2013For example, “[notwithstanding this principle ‘[i]n some circumstances, even though a trial court’s ruling is based on improper reasoning, the ruling will be upheld if there is any theory or principle of law in the record which would support the ruling.’ ” Robertson, 829 So.2d at 906 (quoting Radio Station WQBA, 731 So.2d at 644 ). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State v. West
green
1 sentence1993Jones v. Stoutenburgh, 91 So.2d 299 (Fla. 1956); Booth v. Mary Carter Paint Co., 182 So.2d 292 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966); State v. West, 262 So.2d 457 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972); Burroughs Corp. v. American Druggists' Insurance Co., 450 So.2d 540 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Jones v. Stoutenburgh
green
1 sentence1993Jones v. Stoutenburgh, 91 So.2d 299 (Fla. 1956); Booth v. Mary Carter Paint Co., 182 So.2d 292 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966); State v. West, 262 So.2d 457 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972); Burroughs Corp. v. American Druggists' Insurance Co., 450 So.2d 540 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Booth v. Mary Carter Paint Company
green
1 sentence1993Jones v. Stoutenburgh, 91 So.2d 299 (Fla. 1956); Booth v. Mary Carter Paint Co., 182 So.2d 292 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966); State v. West, 262 So.2d 457 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972); Burroughs Corp. v. American Druggists' Insurance Co., 450 So.2d 540 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Burroughs Corp. v. AMERICAN DRUGGISTS'INS. CO.
green
1 sentence1993Jones v. Stoutenburgh, 91 So.2d 299 (Fla. 1956); Booth v. Mary Carter Paint Co., 182 So.2d 292 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966); State v. West, 262 So.2d 457 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972); Burroughs Corp. v. American Druggists' Insurance Co., 450 So.2d 540 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
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.