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 2 courts 1975–2012 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 |
|---|---|---|
STATE, DEPT. OF ADMINSTRATION v. Stevensgreen2 sentences1986The creation of two such classes for purposes of providing routine professional dental treatment appears to be “an agency statement of general applicability ... intended to be applied with the force of a rule of law.” State, Department of Administration v. Stevens, 344 So.2d 290, 296 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). 1986A rule is a statement “of general applicability . . . applied and . . . intended to be applied with the force of a rule of law.” State, Department of Administration v. Stevens, 344 So.2d 290, 296 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); McDonald v. Department of Banking and Finance, 346 So.2d 569, 580-581 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). * * * A policy implicit in agency action does not ipso facto amount to an administrative rule, even when it has been consistently applied. | 4 | 5 |
McDonald v. Dept. of Banking and Financegreen2 sentences1997A rule is a statement "of general applicability ... applied and ... intended to be applied with the force of a rule of law." State, Department of Administration v. Stevens, 34[4] So.2d 290, 296 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); McDonald v. Department of Banking and Finance, 346 So.2d 569, 580-581 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977).... 1986A rule is a statement “of general applicability . . . applied and . . . intended to be applied with the force of a rule of law.” State, Department of Administration v. Stevens, 344 So.2d 290, 296 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); McDonald v. Department of Banking and Finance, 346 So.2d 569, 580-581 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). * * * A policy implicit in agency action does not ipso facto amount to an administrative rule, even when it has been consistently applied. | 3 | 4 |
Bass v. Stategreen1 sentence2012See Bass v. State, 58 Fla. 1 , 50 So. 531 , 533 (Fla.1909) (denying claim for relief based on court’s modification of requested special instruction because requested instruction was clearly erroneous); Young v. State, 24 Fla. 147 , 3 So. 881 , 881 (1888) (stating that modification that essentially changes the force of an instruction is error unless instruction not pertinent). | 1 | 1 |
Williams v. Stategreen1 sentence2010In those instances “ ‘[w]hen [judicial] neutrality ‘is breached, the State has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not contribute to the verdict.’ ” Williams v. State, 901 So.2d 357, 359 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (quoting Simmons v. State, 803 So.2d 787, 789 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)). | 1 | 1 |
Simmons v. Stategreen1 sentence2010In those instances “ ‘[w]hen [judicial] neutrality ‘is breached, the State has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not contribute to the verdict.’ ” Williams v. State, 901 So.2d 357, 359 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (quoting Simmons v. State, 803 So.2d 787, 789 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)). | 1 | 1 |
Thorp v. Thorpgreen1 sentence1978See also Thorp v. Thorp, 70 Vt. 46 , 39 A. 245 (1897); Rutherford v. Jamieson, 65 Miss. 219 , 3 So. 412 (1888); Hall v. Gottsche, 114 Iowa 147 , 86 N.W. 257 (1901). *320 The rule is logical and fair. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Robinson v. State
green
2 sentences2005Id. 2005Id. | 2 | 2005–2005 |
State, Dept. of Admin., Etc., Person. v. Harvey
green
2 sentences1985McDonald v. Department of Banking and Finance, 346 SO.2d 569 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); Florida State University v. Dann, 400 So.2d 1304 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Department of Administration v. Stevens, supra. In State, Department of Administration v. Harvey, 356 So.2d 323 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), the First District Court of Appeal stated: The breadth of the definition of Section 120.52(14) indicates that the Legislature intended the term to cover a great variety of agency statements regardless of how the agency designates them. 1984McDonald v. Department of Banking and Finance, 346 So.2d 569 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); Florida State University v. Dann, 400 So.2d 1304 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Department of Administration v. Stevens, supra. In State, Department of Administration v. Harvey, 356 So.2d 323 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), the First District Court of Appeal stated: The breadth of the definition in Section 120.52 (14) indicates that the Legislature intended the term to cover a great variety of agency statements regardless of how the agency designates them. | 2 | 1984–1985 |
Florida State University v. Dann
green
2 sentences1985McDonald v. Department of Banking and Finance, 346 SO.2d 569 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); Florida State University v. Dann, 400 So.2d 1304 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Department of Administration v. Stevens, supra. In State, Department of Administration v. Harvey, 356 So.2d 323 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), the First District Court of Appeal stated: The breadth of the definition of Section 120.52(14) indicates that the Legislature intended the term to cover a great variety of agency statements regardless of how the agency designates them. 1984McDonald v. Department of Banking and Finance, 346 So.2d 569 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); Florida State University v. Dann, 400 So.2d 1304 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Department of Administration v. Stevens, supra. In State, Department of Administration v. Harvey, 356 So.2d 323 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), the First District Court of Appeal stated: The breadth of the definition in Section 120.52 (14) indicates that the Legislature intended the term to cover a great variety of agency statements regardless of how the agency designates them. | 2 | 1984–1985 |
Young v. State
green
1 sentence2012See Bass v. State, 58 Fla. 1 , 50 So. 531 , 533 (Fla.1909) (denying claim for relief based on court’s modification of requested special instruction because requested instruction was clearly erroneous); Young v. State, 24 Fla. 147 , 3 So. 881 , 881 (1888) (stating that modification that essentially changes the force of an instruction is error unless instruction not pertinent). | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Home Health Prof. v. Dept. of H & Rs
green
1 sentence1986Home Health Professional Services, Inc. v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 463 So.2d 345 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Rutherford v. Jamieson
neutral
1 sentence1978See also Thorp v. Thorp, 70 Vt. 46 , 39 A. 245 (1897); Rutherford v. Jamieson, 65 Miss. 219 , 3 So. 412 (1888); Hall v. Gottsche, 114 Iowa 147 , 86 N.W. 257 (1901). *320 The rule is logical and fair. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Biglane v. Rawles
green
2 sentences1978Biglane v. Rawls, 247 Miss. 226 , 153 So.2d 665 (1963), recognized the force of this rule and collected various authorities from different jurisdictions. 1978Biglane v. Rawls, 247 Miss. 226 , 153 So.2d 665 (1963), recognized the force of this rule and collected various authorities from different jurisdictions. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Hall v. Gottsche
neutral
2 sentences1978See also Thorp v. Thorp, 70 Vt. 46 , 39 A. 245 (1897); Rutherford v. Jamieson, 65 Miss. 219 , 3 So. 412 (1888); Hall v. Gottsche, 114 Iowa 147 , 86 N.W. 257 (1901). *320 The rule is logical and fair. 1978See also Thorp v. Thorp, 70 Vt. 46 , 39 A. 245 (1897); Rutherford v. Jamieson, 65 Miss. 219 , 3 So. 412 (1888); Hall v. Gottsche, 114 Iowa 147 , 86 N.W. 257 (1901). *320 The rule is logical and fair. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
In Re Wade, Suratorship Wade v. Janney
green
2 sentences1975The general statute is read as silently excluding from its operation the cases which have been provided for by the special one. * * * The fact that the general act contains a clause repealing acts inconsistent with it does not diminish the force of this rule of construction." In addition, the Supreme Court in In re Wade, 150 Fla. 440 , 7 So.2d 797 , said: "It is said that the later general Act will be presumed to have made an exception of the prior special one, unless the contrary clearly appears." *177 We now turn to the Legislative intent as expressed in the new A.P.A. 1975The general statute is read as silently excluding from its operation the cases which have been provided for by the special one. * * * The fact that the general act contains a clause repealing acts inconsistent with it does not diminish the force of this rule of construction." In addition, the Supreme Court in In re Wade, 150 Fla. 440 , 7 So.2d 797 , said: "It is said that the later general Act will be presumed to have made an exception of the prior special one, unless the contrary clearly appears." *177 We now turn to the Legislative intent as expressed in the new A.P.A. | 1 | 1975–1975 |
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.