15 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1973–2015 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 |
|---|---|---|
Raye v. Fred Oakley Motors, Inc.green2 sentences2010Although it acknowledged the Texas Supreme Court’s holding that “actual damages are those damages recoverable at common law,” the third district nonetheless adopted a narrower definition of “actual damages” from an intermediate Texas appellate court which interpreted a statute “similar” to FDUTPA: Generally, the measure of actual damages is the difference in the market value of the product or service in the condition in which it was delivered and its market value in the condition in which it should have been delivered according to the contract of the parties, [citations omitted] A notable exce 2006The standard for determining the actual damages recoverable under FDUTPA is well-defined in the case law: "[T]he measure of actual damages is the difference in the market value of the product or service in the condition in which it was delivered and its market value in the condition in which it should have been delivered according to the contract of the parties. [. . .] A notable exception to the rule may exist when the product is rendered valueless as a result of the defectthen the purchase price is the appropriate measure of actual damages." Rollins, Inc. v. Heller, 454 So.2d 580, 585 (Fla. | 6 | 7 |
Rollins, Inc. v. Hellergreen2 sentences2010Although it acknowledged the Texas Supreme Court’s holding that “actual damages are those damages recoverable at common law,” the third district nonetheless adopted a narrower definition of “actual damages” from an intermediate Texas appellate court which interpreted a statute “similar” to FDUTPA: Generally, the measure of actual damages is the difference in the market value of the product or service in the condition in which it was delivered and its market value in the condition in which it should have been delivered according to the contract of the parties, [citations omitted] A notable exce 2006The standard for determining the actual damages recoverable under FDUTPA is well-defined in the case law: "[T]he measure of actual damages is the difference in the market value of the product or service in the condition in which it was delivered and its market value in the condition in which it should have been delivered according to the contract of the parties. [. . .] A notable exception to the rule may exist when the product is rendered valueless as a result of the defectthen the purchase price is the appropriate measure of actual damages." Rollins, Inc. v. Heller, 454 So.2d 580, 585 (Fla. | 5 | 6 |
Urling v. Helms Exterminators, Inc.green2 sentences2003Rollins, Inc. v. Heller, 454 So.2d 580, 585 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)(quoting Raye v. Fred Oakley Motors, Inc., 646 S.W.2d 288 , 290 *1102 (Tex.App.1983)) (citations omitted); see Coghlan v. Wellcraft Marine Corp., 240 F.3d 449 , 453 (5th Cir.2001)(holding that the measure of damages in FDUPTA actions is "the value of the product as promised minus the value of the product delivered."); Urling v. Helms Exterminators, Inc., 468 So.2d 451 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). [1] In the light most favorable to H & J and Asphalt, the record on appeal indicates that when the analog radio communication system and the add-o 1998Id. at 585 (quoting Raye v. Fred Oakley Motors, Inc., 646 S.W.2d 288, 290 (Tex.App. 1983)); accord Urling, 468 So.2d at 454 ; see also Maroone Chevrolet, Inc. v. Nordstrom, 587 So.2d 514 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)(an actual loss must be shown prior to recovery under Chapter 501 and entitlement to nominal damages is not enough). | 1 | 2 |
State v. Smileygreen1 sentence2011Prior to the enactment of section 776.013, Florida common law provided that, with the notable exception of the “castle doctrine,” a person could not resort to deadly force without first using every reasonable means within his or her power to avoid the danger, including retreat “to the wall.” See Weiand v. State, 732 So.2d 1044 , 1049 (Fla.1999); State v. Smiley, 927 So.2d 1000, 1001 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). | 1 | 1 |
Henry S. Miller Co. v. Bynumgreen1 sentence2010This “benefit of the bargain” measure of damages “utilizes an expectancy theory, evaluating] the difference between the value as represented and the value actually received.” Henry S. Miller Co. v. Bynum, 836 S.W.2d 160, 163 (Tex.1992) (Phillips, C.J., concurring). | 1 | 1 |
H & J PAVING OF FLORIDA, INC. v. Nextel, Inc.green1 sentence2006H & J Paving v. Nextel, 849 So.2d 1099, 1101 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003) (quoting Rollins, Inc. v. Heller, 454 So.2d 580, 585 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)) (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
Coghlan v. Wellcraft Marine Corp.green1 sentence2003Rollins, Inc. v. Heller, 454 So.2d 580, 585 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)(quoting Raye v. Fred Oakley Motors, Inc., 646 S.W.2d 288 , 290 *1102 (Tex.App.1983)) (citations omitted); see Coghlan v. Wellcraft Marine Corp., 240 F.3d 449 , 453 (5th Cir.2001)(holding that the measure of damages in FDUPTA actions is "the value of the product as promised minus the value of the product delivered."); Urling v. Helms Exterminators, Inc., 468 So.2d 451 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). [1] In the light most favorable to H & J and Asphalt, the record on appeal indicates that when the analog radio communication system and the add-o | 1 | 1 |
Haag v. Stategreen1 sentence1998However, this rule was adopted in large part because, unlike other litigants, prisoners have no choice but to "entrust their appeals to the vagaries of the mail and the clerk's process for stamping incoming papers." Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614, 616 (Fla.1992)(quoting Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 271 , 108 S.Ct. 2379, 2382 , 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988)). | 1 | 1 |
Maroone Chevrolet, Inc. v. Nordstromgreen1 sentence1998Id. at 585 (quoting Raye v. Fred Oakley Motors, Inc., 646 S.W.2d 288, 290 (Tex.App. 1983)); accord Urling, 468 So.2d at 454 ; see also Maroone Chevrolet, Inc. v. Nordstrom, 587 So.2d 514 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)(an actual loss must be shown prior to recovery under Chapter 501 and entitlement to nominal damages is not enough). | 1 | 1 |
Ohio v. Robertsred2 sentences1997See Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56, 56 , 100 S.Ct. 2531, 2533-34 , 65 L.Ed.2d 597 (1980). *404 The most notable exception recognized by the United States Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of Florida is the use of videotaped and closed-circuit testimony of psychologically vulnerable witnesses, such as children, in sexual abuse cases. 1997See Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56, 56 , 100 S.Ct. 2531, 2533-34 , 65 L.Ed.2d 597 (1980). *404 The most notable exception recognized by the United States Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of Florida is the use of videotaped and closed-circuit testimony of psychologically vulnerable witnesses, such as children, in sexual abuse cases. | 1 | 1 |
Maryland v. Craiggreen2 sentences1997See Craig, 497 U.S. at 836 , 110 S.Ct. at 3158-59 ; Glendening v. State, 536 So.2d 212 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 907 , 109 S.Ct. 3219 , 106 L.Ed.2d 569 (1989). 1997See Craig, 497 U.S. at 836 , 110 S.Ct. at 3158-59 ; Glendening v. State, 536 So.2d 212 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 907 , 109 S.Ct. 3219 , 106 L.Ed.2d 569 (1989). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Julio Piccinonnagreen2 sentences1995The most notable exception is United States v. Piccinonna, 885 F.2d 1529, 1532 (11th Cir.1989). 1995In 1989, the Eleventh Circuit sitting en banc surveyed the developing scientific literature and concluded that it was "no longer accurate to state categorically that polygraph testing lacks general acceptance for use in all circumstances." [5] 885 F.2d at 1532 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Fla. Physician's Ins. Reciprocal v. Stanley
green
2 sentences2015The notable exception at issue here is the rule announced by this Court in Stanley.1 The plaintiffs in Stanley alleged that the defendants’ medical negligence resulted in the intellectual disability and cerebral palsy suffered by their son. 452 So. 2d at 515 . 2015The notable exception at issue here is the rule announced by this Court in Stanley . 1 The plaintiffs in Stanley alleged that the defendants’ medical negligence resulted in the intellectual disability and cerebral palsy suffered by their son. 452 So.2d at 515 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Weiand v. State
green
1 sentence2011Prior to the enactment of section 776.013, Florida common law provided that, with the notable exception of the “castle doctrine,” a person could not resort to deadly force without first using every reasonable means within his or her power to avoid the danger, including retreat “to the wall.” See Weiand v. State, 732 So.2d 1044 , 1049 (Fla.1999); State v. Smiley, 927 So.2d 1000, 1001 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Houston v. Lack
green
2 sentences1998However, this rule was adopted in large part because, unlike other litigants, prisoners have no choice but to "entrust their appeals to the vagaries of the mail and the clerk's process for stamping incoming papers." Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614, 616 (Fla.1992)(quoting Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 271 , 108 S.Ct. 2379, 2382 , 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988)). 1998However, this rule was adopted in large part because, unlike other litigants, prisoners have no choice but to "entrust their appeals to the vagaries of the mail and the clerk's process for stamping incoming papers." Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614, 616 (Fla.1992)(quoting Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 271 , 108 S.Ct. 2379, 2382 , 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988)). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Glendening v. State
green
1 sentence1997See Craig, 497 U.S. at 836 , 110 S.Ct. at 3158-59 ; Glendening v. State, 536 So.2d 212 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 907 , 109 S.Ct. 3219 , 106 L.Ed.2d 569 (1989). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Posey v. Ohio
green
1 sentence1997See Craig, 497 U.S. at 836 , 110 S.Ct. at 3158-59 ; Glendening v. State, 536 So.2d 212 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 907 , 109 S.Ct. 3219 , 106 L.Ed.2d 569 (1989). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Glendening v. Florida
green
1 sentence1997See Craig, 497 U.S. at 836 , 110 S.Ct. at 3158-59 ; Glendening v. State, 536 So.2d 212 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 907 , 109 S.Ct. 3219 , 106 L.Ed.2d 569 (1989). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Baker v. United States
green
1 sentence1997See Craig, 497 U.S. at 836 , 110 S.Ct. at 3158-59 ; Glendening v. State, 536 So.2d 212 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 907 , 109 S.Ct. 3219 , 106 L.Ed.2d 569 (1989). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Kawauchi v. Tabata
green
2 sentences1977As with every generality, however, there is a notable exception, best expressed in a scholarly, well-reasoned opinion from the Supreme Court of Hawaii, cited as Kawauchi v. Tabata, 49 Haw. 160 , 413 P.2d 221 (1966). 1977As with every generality, however, there is a notable exception, best expressed in a scholarly, well-reasoned opinion from the Supreme Court of Hawaii, cited as Kawauchi v. Tabata, 49 Haw. 160 , 413 P.2d 221 (1966). | 1 | 1977–1977 |
Deas v. State
green
2 sentences1973That exception is found here in Florida and was articulated by the court in Deas v. State, (1935) 119 Fla. 839 , 161 So. 729 . 1973That exception is found here in Florida and was articulated by the court in Deas v. State, (1935) 119 Fla. 839 , 161 So. 729 . | 1 | 1973–1973 |
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.