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.
13 Florida opinions name it 1 courts 1996–2024 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Rollins, Inc. v. Butlandgreen2 sentences2024“A party opposing summary judgment must do more than simply show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts,” and “if the evidence is merely colorable, or is not sufficiently probative, summary judgment may be granted.” Id. (quotations omitted); see also Chowdhury v. BankUnited, N.A., 366 So. 3d 1130 , 1133 n.2 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (explaining same). 5 FDUTPA prohibits “[u]nfair methods of competition, unconscionable acts or practices, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce.” § 501.204(1), Fla. Stat. Accordingly, “a consumer claim fo 2019Only when an enforcing authority is seeking recovery of actual damages under subparagraph (1)(c), or a private individual is seeking recovery of consumers' actual damages-as opposed to injunctive relief-is that party required to plead and prove "actual damages." Id. ; Rollins, Inc. v. Butland , 951 So.2d 860 , 869 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (holding that a private individual seeking a consumer claim for damages under FDUTPA has to prove actual damages); Chicken Unlimited, Inc. v. Bockover , 374 So.2d 96 , 97 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979) (holding that a plaintiff seeking actual damages under FDUTPA must show tha | 3 | 5 |
Chicken Unlimited, Inc. v. Bockovergreen2 sentences2019Only when an enforcing authority is seeking recovery of actual damages under subparagraph (1)(c), or a private individual is seeking recovery of consumers' actual damages-as opposed to injunctive relief-is that party required to plead and prove "actual damages." Id. ; Rollins, Inc. v. Butland , 951 So.2d 860 , 869 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (holding that a private individual seeking a consumer claim for damages under FDUTPA has to prove actual damages); Chicken Unlimited, Inc. v. Bockover , 374 So.2d 96 , 97 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979) (holding that a plaintiff seeking actual damages under FDUTPA must show tha 2019Only when an enforcing authority is seeking recovery of actual damages under subparagraph (1)(c), or a private individual is seeking recovery of consumers' actual damages-as opposed to injunctive relief-is that party required to plead and prove "actual damages." Id. ; Rollins, Inc. v. Butland , 951 So.2d 860 , 869 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (holding that a private individual seeking a consumer claim for damages under FDUTPA has to prove actual damages); Chicken Unlimited, Inc. v. Bockover , 374 So.2d 96 , 97 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979) (holding that a plaintiff seeking actual damages under FDUTPA must show tha | 2 | 4 |
State Office of Atty. Gen. v. Wyndham Intern., Inc.green1 sentence2024“A party opposing summary judgment must do more than simply show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts,” and “if the evidence is merely colorable, or is not sufficiently probative, summary judgment may be granted.” Id. (quotations omitted); see also Chowdhury v. BankUnited, N.A., 366 So. 3d 1130 , 1133 n.2 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (explaining same). 5 FDUTPA prohibits “[u]nfair methods of competition, unconscionable acts or practices, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce.” § 501.204(1), Fla. Stat. Accordingly, “a consumer claim fo | 1 | 1 |
Rollins, Inc. v. Hellergreen1 sentence2006The 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 defect then the purchase price is the appropriate measure of actual damages." Rollins, Inc. v. Heller, 454 So.2d 580, 585 (Fl | 1 | 1 |
Raye v. Fred Oakley Motors, Inc.green1 sentence2006The 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 defect then the purchase price is the appropriate measure of actual damages." Rollins, Inc. v. Heller, 454 So.2d 580, 585 (Fl | 1 | 1 |
Barth v. Khubanigreen1 sentence2000See Barth v. Khubani, 748 So.2d 260 (Fla. 1999). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Outreach Housing, LLC v. Office of the Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs
green
2 sentences2019Only when an enforcing authority is seeking recovery of actual damages under subparagraph (1)(c), or a private individual is seeking recovery of consumers' actual damages-as opposed to injunctive relief-is that party required to plead and prove "actual damages." Id. ; Rollins, Inc. v. Butland , 951 So.2d 860 , 869 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (holding that a private individual seeking a consumer claim for damages under FDUTPA has to prove actual damages); Chicken Unlimited, Inc. v. Bockover , 374 So.2d 96 , 97 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979) (holding that a plaintiff seeking actual damages under FDUTPA must show tha 2019Only when an enforcing authority is seeking recovery of actual damages under subparagraph (1)(c), or a private individual is seeking recovery of consumers' actual damages-as opposed to injunctive relief-is that party required to plead and prove "actual damages." Id. ; Rollins, Inc. v. Butland , 951 So.2d 860 , 869 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (holding that a private individual seeking a consumer claim for damages under FDUTPA has to prove actual damages); Chicken Unlimited, Inc. v. Bockover , 374 So.2d 96 , 97 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979) (holding that a plaintiff seeking actual damages under FDUTPA must show tha | 2 | 2019–2019 |
Caribbean Cruise Line, Inc. v. Better Business Bureau of Palm Beach County, Inc.
green
1 sentence2019Caribbean Cruise Line, 169 So. 3d at 169 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
General Motors LLC v. Bowie
neutral
1 sentence2011Bowie, 58 So.3d 934 Significantly, the consumer did not claim any other “pecuniary loss.” For the same reason, we reverse and remand this case to the trial court for entry of a judgment in favor of the manufacturer and for re-consideration of the Proposal for Settlement. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Ackerman v. State
neutral
1 sentence2008"A consumer claim for damages under FDUTPA has three elements: (1) a deceptive act or unfair practice; (2) causation; and (3) actual damages." Rollins, Inc. v. Butland, 951 So.2d 860, 869 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006), review denied, 962 So.2d 335 (Fla.2007). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Penske Truck Leasing Co., LP v. Moore
green
1 sentence2003In a wrongful death action, the court in Penske Truck Leasing Co., LP v. Moore, 702 So.2d 1295 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), applied the two-issue rule by presuming that the jury found for the plaintiffs on both theories of negligence submitted to the jury. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Seifert v. US Home Corp.
green
1 sentence2003We conclude that the trial court was overly restrictive in applying the guidelines discussed in Seifert v. U.S. Home Corp., 750 So.2d 633 (Fla.1999), to exclude certain tort and statutory issues from arbitration. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Zimmer, Inc. v. Birnbaum
green
1 sentence2003For example, in Zimmer, Inc. v. Birnbaum, 758 So.2d 714 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 786 So.2d 1193 (Fla.2000), the court applied the two-issue rule in a products liability case because the jury instructions included two standards for determining whether the product was unreasonably dangerousthe ordinary consumer test and the risk benefit testand the verdict form did not require the jury to identify its basis for deciding that the product was defective. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Abbott Laboratories, Inc. v. Segura
green
2 sentences1996Instead, the Texas court was persuaded that the policy reasons precluding indirect purchaser recovery under the federal antitrust law announced in Hanover Shoe and Illinois Brick Co. applied with equal force to preclude a consumer claim under the Texas DTPA. 907 S.W.2d at 507 . 1996The Segura court concluded that to rule otherwise would undermine administration of the Texas Antitrust Act. 907 S.W.2d at 505-06 . [8] It is apparent, however, that the Florida DTPA is distinguishable from the Texas DTPA in many important respects. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
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.