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.
14 Florida opinions name it 3 courts 1919–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
Rodriguez v. Stategreen2 sentences2018Accordingly, Aquasol’s motion to disqualify the trial judge was legally insufficient because it was premised on nothing more than its disagreement with an adverse legal ruling, and failed to establish that the court’s actions “would create in a reasonably prudent person a well-founded fear of not receiving a fair and impartial trial.” Rodriguez v. State, 919 So. 2d 1252, 1274 (Fla. 2005). 2018Accordingly, Aquasol’s motion to disqualify the trial judge was legally insufficient because it was premised on nothing more than its disagreement with an adverse legal ruling, and failed to establish that the court’s actions “would create in a reasonably prudent person a well-founded fear of not receiving a fair and impartial trial.” Rodriguez v. State, 919 So. 2d 1252, 1274 (Fla. 2005). 5 Further, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance to Aquasol. | 2 | 2 |
Florida Patient's Compensation Fund v. Rowegreen1 sentence1991In establishing this fee, the Court has considered the rate charged in the community by lawyers of reasonably comparable skill, experience and reputation for similar services in accordance with the dictates of Florida Patient Compensation Fund v Rowe, 472 So.2d 1145, 1151 (Fla. 1985). | 1 | 1 |
Hallman v. Stategreen1 sentence1979See, e. g., Hallman v. State, 371 So.2d 482 (Fla.1979). | 1 | 1 |
Atlas Sewing Center, Inc. v. Belk's Department Storegreen1 sentence1966See Atlas Sewing Center, Inc. v. Belk’s Department Store, Fla.App.1964, 162 So.2d 274 ; Harvey Building, Inc. v. Haley, Fla.1965, 175 So.2d 780 ; and Continental Casualty Co. v. Borthwick, Fla.App.1965, 177 So.2d 687 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Cotton v. State
green
1 sentence2018Cf. Cotton, 176 So. 3d at 315 & n.5 (approving the admission of similar fact evidence of lewd or lascivious conduct committed by the defendant against the victim’s two sisters but finding that the trial court abused its discretion in also permitting introduction of the defendant’s prior sexual batteries of the sisters). 7 | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Robinson v. State
green
1 sentence2013In Robinson v. State, 462 So.2d 471 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), the First District reversed convictions for sexual battery and kidnapping and remanded for a new trial after defense counsel filed an untimely but successful motion for new trial. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Dion v. Bald
green
1 sentence1996In the amended motion, the appellee argued that Dion v. Bald, 664 So.2d 348 , which had been released by this court after the hearing on the motion to dismiss, required a showing of contact with the opposing party in order to establish good cause under Rule 1.420(e). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Franklin v. State
green
2 sentences1989We have for review Franklin v. State, 526 So.2d 159 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988) (en banc), which certified the following question of great public importance: Having sentenced a defendant to a term of incarceration followed by probation or community control, may the court after a violation of the probation or community control, impose any sentence which could have been originally imposed with credit for time served and must such sentence be within the guideline range unless valid reasons for departure are given[?] Id. at 164 . 1989We have for review Franklin v. State, 526 So.2d 159 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988) (en banc), which certified the following question of great public importance: Having sentenced a defendant to a term of incarceration followed by probation or community control, may the court after a violation of the probation or community control, impose any sentence which could have been originally imposed with credit for time served and must such sentence be within the guideline range unless valid reasons for departure are given[?] Id. at 164 . | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Frantz v. Golebiewski
green
1 sentence1983We agree with the trial court and after hearing, deny the request for a Writ of Certiorari on authority of Frantz v. Golebiewski, supra . [1] JORGENSON, Judge, dissenting. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Roviaro v. United States
green
2 sentences1977The Supreme Court of the United States in Roviaro v. United States, 353 U.S. 53 , 77 S.Ct. 623 , 1 L.Ed.2d 639 (1957), established certain criteria to be weighed to determine when disclosure is required. 1977The Supreme Court of the United States in Roviaro v. United States, 353 U.S. 53 , 77 S.Ct. 623 , 1 L.Ed.2d 639 (1957), established certain criteria to be weighed to determine when disclosure is required. | 1 | 1977–1977 |
McDole v. State
green
1 sentence1974The Supreme Court pointed out the difference in the factual situations between Wilson and Mc-Dole v. State, Fla., 283 So.2d 553 , in which latter case it held that the mere announcement by the trial court after hearing on a motion to suppress a confession that “the motion is denied” does not sufficiently indicate that the judge had made the required determination that the confession was voluntarily given before allowing it to be considered by the jury. | 1 | 1974–1974 |
White v. Pinellas County
green
1 sentence1967We do not deem it necessary to again recite the facts of the case since they are adequately set out in the Supreme Court’s opinion at 185 So.2d 468 . | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Continental Casualty Company v. Borthwick
green
1 sentence1966See Atlas Sewing Center, Inc. v. Belk’s Department Store, Fla.App.1964, 162 So.2d 274 ; Harvey Building, Inc. v. Haley, Fla.1965, 175 So.2d 780 ; and Continental Casualty Co. v. Borthwick, Fla.App.1965, 177 So.2d 687 . | 1 | 1966–1966 |
Harvey Building, Inc. v. Haley
green
1 sentence1966See Atlas Sewing Center, Inc. v. Belk’s Department Store, Fla.App.1964, 162 So.2d 274 ; Harvey Building, Inc. v. Haley, Fla.1965, 175 So.2d 780 ; and Continental Casualty Co. v. Borthwick, Fla.App.1965, 177 So.2d 687 . | 1 | 1966–1966 |
Berry v. State
green
1 sentence1919Cr. 202, 111 Pac. | 1 | 1919–1919 |
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.