11 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1988–2015 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 |
|---|---|---|
Walton v. Stategreen1 sentence2015Id. at 203; see also Banks, 150 So.3d at 802 (rejecting public records requests based upon a general challenge to the lethal injection protocol); Chavez, 132 So.3d at 829-30 (affirming the denial of public records requests that sought information about (1) the acquisition of midazolam and its use in Florida’s lethal injection protocol, and the decision to retain the three-drug protocol; (2) consultations with experts about midazolam before the current lethal injection protocol was issued; (3) the manufacturer and distributor of the drugs used in the lethal injection protocol; ■ and (4) checkli | 1 | 1 |
Juan Carlos Chavez v. State of Floridagreen1 sentence2015Id. at 203; see also Banks, 150 So.3d at 802 (rejecting public records requests based upon a general challenge to the lethal injection protocol); Chavez, 132 So.3d at 829-30 (affirming the denial of public records requests that sought information about (1) the acquisition of midazolam and its use in Florida’s lethal injection protocol, and the decision to retain the three-drug protocol; (2) consultations with experts about midazolam before the current lethal injection protocol was issued; (3) the manufacturer and distributor of the drugs used in the lethal injection protocol; ■ and (4) checkli | 1 | 1 |
Chadwick Banks v. State of Floridagreen1 sentence2015Id. at 203; see also Banks, 150 So.3d at 802 (rejecting public records requests based upon a general challenge to the lethal injection protocol); Chavez, 132 So.3d at 829-30 (affirming the denial of public records requests that sought information about (1) the acquisition of midazolam and its use in Florida’s lethal injection protocol, and the decision to retain the three-drug protocol; (2) consultations with experts about midazolam before the current lethal injection protocol was issued; (3) the manufacturer and distributor of the drugs used in the lethal injection protocol; ■ and (4) checkli | 1 | 1 |
Moore v. Pearsongreen1 sentence2013Cf. Moore v. Pearson, 789 So.2d 316, 318 (Fla.2001) (“This Court accepted jurisdiction and granted DOC's motion to stay the mandate of the district court's decision pending our review of the case. | 1 | 1 |
Department of Corrections v. Hargrovegreen2 sentences2005Cf. Dep't of Corr. v. Hargrove, 615 So.2d 199, 200-01 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993) (analyzing arguments concerning the reasonableness of a particular DOC rule, in terms of whether it was "related to the purpose of the enabling legislation" and whether the rule was "arbitrary and capricious," only after first determining that there existed specific statutory authority for the rule). 2005Cf. Dep't of Corr. v. Hargrove, 615 So.2d 199, 200-01 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993) (analyzing arguments concerning the reasonableness of a particular DOC rule, in terms of whether it was "related to the purpose of the enabling legislation" and whether the rule was "arbitrary and capricious," only after first determining that there existed specific statutory authority for the rule). | 1 | 1 |
FLA. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS v. McCartygreen1 sentence1996See Florida Department of Corrections v. McCarty, 610 So.2d 693 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)( DOC’s alleged breach of contract did not subject it to the “sword wielder” doctrine). | 1 | 1 |
Holcomb v. Department of Correctionsgreen1 sentence1993Holcomb v. Department of Corrections, 609 So.2d 751, 753 (Fla. 1st DCA1992). | 1 | 1 |
New Deal Cab Company v. Stubbsgreen1 sentence1988See New Deal Cab Company v. Stubbs, 90 So.2d 614 (Fla.1956). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sims v. State
green
1 sentence2006Further, the circuit court observed that defense counsel's assertion "that she `fears' that she no longer has a complete file of [Rutherford's] records falls well short of the allegations and proof required to obtain additional records pursuant to Rule 3.852(i)." Id. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Cole v. Department of Corrections
green
1 sentence2003In Cole v. Department of Corrections, 726 So.2d 854 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), this court reversed and reinstated appellant's complaint. . | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Turner v. State
green
1 sentence2001The State sought review of the district court's decision in this Court on the basis that the opinion expressly construed the constitutional separations of power doctrine in article II, section 3 of the Florida Constitution. [4] The State further argued that the district court's decision expressly and directly conflicts with the decisions of other district courts in Turner v. State, 689 So.2d 1107 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), and Nieves v. State, 779 So.2d 294 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999), on the same question of law. [5] This Court accepted jurisdiction and granted DOC's motion to stay the mandate of the distric | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Nieves v. State
green
1 sentence2001The State sought review of the district court's decision in this Court on the basis that the opinion expressly construed the constitutional separations of power doctrine in article II, section 3 of the Florida Constitution. [4] The State further argued that the district court's decision expressly and directly conflicts with the decisions of other district courts in Turner v. State, 689 So.2d 1107 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), and Nieves v. State, 779 So.2d 294 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999), on the same question of law. [5] This Court accepted jurisdiction and granted DOC's motion to stay the mandate of the distric | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Systems Mgt. Associates v. State, Etc.
green
1 sentence1999Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(h) delays rendition and tolls the time for taking an appeal when "there has been filed in the lower tribunal an authorized and timely motion for new trial or rehearing." The committee note following Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(h) states: [I]f the lower tribunal is an administrative agency whose rules of practice denominate motions identical to those listed [in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(h)] by a different label, the substance of the motion controls and rendition is postponed accordingly. *369 We have applied these principle | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Dept. of Corrections v. CAREER SERVICE COM'N
green
1 sentence1999Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(h) delays rendition and tolls the time for taking an appeal when "there has been filed in the lower tribunal an authorized and timely motion for new trial or rehearing." The committee note following Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(h) states: [I]f the lower tribunal is an administrative agency whose rules of practice denominate motions identical to those listed [in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(h)] by a different label, the substance of the motion controls and rendition is postponed accordingly. *369 We have applied these principle | 1 | 1999–1999 |
City of Hollywood v. Public Employees Relations Commission
neutral
1 sentence1999Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(h) delays rendition and tolls the time for taking an appeal when "there has been filed in the lower tribunal an authorized and timely motion for new trial or rehearing." The committee note following Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(h) states: [I]f the lower tribunal is an administrative agency whose rules of practice denominate motions identical to those listed [in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(h)] by a different label, the substance of the motion controls and rendition is postponed accordingly. *369 We have applied these principle | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Hudson v. Hofmann
green
1 sentence1989Lister v. Walker, 409 So.2d 1156 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Hudson v. Hofmann, 471 So.2d 117 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), review denied, 480 So.2d 1294 (Fla. 1985). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Lister v. Walker
green
1 sentence1989Lister v. Walker, 409 So.2d 1156 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Hudson v. Hofmann, 471 So.2d 117 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), review denied, 480 So.2d 1294 (Fla. 1985). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
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.