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.
12 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2024 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Willis Shaw Express, Inc. v. Hilyer Sod, Inc.green1 sentence2024One only need substitute the holder of a claim for damages—a survivor—in place of party and 1 "Section 768.79 is implemented by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442 ('Proposals for Settlement')." Willis Shaw Express, Inc. v. Hilyer Sod, Inc., 849 So. 2d 276, 278 (Fla. 2003). | 1 | 1 |
Hunt v. Blackburngreen1 sentence2022See Hunt v. Blackburn, 128 U.S. 464, 470 (1888); Neu v. Miami Herald Publ’g. | 1 | 1 |
McDonald's Restaurants of Florida, Inc. v. Doegreen1 sentence2020See § 90.506 ("When the court directs disclosure, it shall take the protective measures that the interests of the holder of the privilege, the interests of the parties, and the furtherance of justice require." (emphasis added)); see also Cassidy, 129 So. 3d at 505-06 ; McDonald's Rests. of Fla. v. Doe, 87 So. 3d 791, 794 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012); Summitbridge, 67 So. 3d at 449 ; Ameritrust Ins. | 1 | 1 |
Bright House Networks, LLC v. Cassidygreen1 sentence2020See § 90.506 ("When the court directs disclosure, it shall take the protective measures that the interests of the holder of the privilege, the interests of the parties, and the furtherance of justice require." (emphasis added)); see also Cassidy, 129 So. 3d at 505-06 ; McDonald's Rests. of Fla. v. Doe, 87 So. 3d 791, 794 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012); Summitbridge, 67 So. 3d at 449 ; Ameritrust Ins. | 1 | 1 |
Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc. v. Fellergreen1 sentence2020Servs., Inc. v. Feller, 163 So. 3d 1252, 1254 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) ("The client is the holder of the privilege and is the only person who may waive it." (quoting Charles W. | 1 | 1 |
Hamilton v. Hamilton Steel Corp.green1 sentence2015The more important point is that the [appellant] had already waived the privilege as a matter of law by making the assertion that her counsel had settled the case without authority._ Writing about this circumstance, the late Judge Letts said, “No court should countenance an announced settlement between counsel foEowed by escape therefrom, if one side arbitrarily reneges and then seals’ his counsel’s lips by invoking the attorney-client privilege.” Hamilton v. Hamilton Steel Corp., 409 So.2d 1111, 1114 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). | 1 | 1 |
Bolin v. Stategreen1 sentence2001See Bolin v. State, 650 So.2d 21, 24 (Fla.1995) ( Bolin II ); § 90.507, Fla. Stat. (1995). | 1 | 1 |
Becker Metals Corp. v. West Florida Scrap Metalsgreen1 sentence1998Becker Metals Corp. v. West Florida Scrap Metals, 407 So.2d 380, 382 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)(even when fraud is alleged and disclosure of trade secrets is necessary, the court is required to "take protective measures to: (1) protect the interests of the holder of the privilege; (2) protect the interests of the parties; and (3) further the interests of justice."). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sea Coast Fire v. Triangle Fire
green
2 sentences2022"When the court directs disclosure, it shall take the protective measures that the interests of the holder of the privilege, the interests of the parties, and the furtherance of justice require." Id. (quoting section 90.506, Florida Statutes). 2020Corp., 899 So. 2d at 1207 ; Sea Coast Fire, Inc., 170 So. 3d at 809 . | 2 | 2020–2022 |
Ameritrust Ins. v. O'Donnell Landscapes
green
1 sentence2020Corp., 899 So. 2d at 1207 ; Sea Coast Fire, Inc., 170 So. 3d at 809 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Summitbridge National Investments LLC v. 1221 Palm Harbor, L.L.C.
green
1 sentence2020See § 90.506 ("When the court directs disclosure, it shall take the protective measures that the interests of the holder of the privilege, the interests of the parties, and the furtherance of justice require." (emphasis added)); see also Cassidy, 129 So. 3d at 505-06 ; McDonald's Rests. of Fla. v. Doe, 87 So. 3d 791, 794 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012); Summitbridge, 67 So. 3d at 449 ; Ameritrust Ins. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Boyd v. State
green
1 sentence2015Id. at 817 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
The Florida Bar v. Jackson
green
2 sentences2010Honesty of intention, and freedom from knowledge of circumstances which ought to put the holder on inquiry.... [It] de-scribefs] that state of mind denoting honesty of purpose ... and, generally speaking means being faithful to one’s duty or obligation.” The Fla. Bar v. Jackson, 494 So.2d 206 (Fla.1986) (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary 628-24 (5th ed. 1979)). 2010Honesty of intention, and freedom from knowledge of circumstances which ought to put the holder on inquiry.... [It] describe[s] that state of mind denoting honesty of purpose ... and, generally speaking means being faithful to one's duty or obligation." The Fla. Bar v. Jackson, 494 So.2d 206 (Fla.1986) (quoting BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 623-24 (5th ed. 1979)). | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Holder v. Keller Kitchen Cabinets
green
1 sentence1994In Holder III, the Florida Supreme Court, answering a question certified by this court, held that under the unique facts presented, section 440.19(l)(a), Florida Statutes, rather than section 440.28, governed Holder’s claim for temporary disability during knee replacement surgery and the impairment resulting therefrom, despite the fact that under an earlier order maximum medical improvement had been determined, and permanent disability compensation had been awarded and paid. 610 So.2d at 1265 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Travelers Indem. Co. v. Salido
neutral
1 sentence1994The privilege may be claimed by the person or his agent or employee." Id. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Keller Kitchen Cabinets v. Holder
neutral
1 sentence1994The “unique facts” of Holder III included the fact that under the prior compensation order, the judge- of compensation claims (JCC) had ruled that “if in the future appel-lee should require a total knee replacement, this would be solely for relief of symptoms resulting from the compensable accident.” However, the Supreme Court noted this language was stricken from the order by this court on appeal in Keller Kitchen Cabinets v. Holder, 397 So.2d 434 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981) {Holder I), although the order was otherwise affirmed. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.