early rule in Florida

1961“After discussing a few decisions appearing to adhere to the substantial competent evidence rule, including Hart v. Held, 149 Fla. 33 , 5 So.2d 878 , cited by the District Court of Appeal, First District, in the present case, we announced, unequivocally we thought, adherénce ‘to the early rule placing in trial courts broad discretion of such firmness that it (the ruling) would not be disturbed except on clear showing of abuse * * *.’ We elaborated on this announcement by reference to the close contact of the judge with the trial, his opportunity therefore better to understand the ultimate deci

1961“After discussing a few decisions appearing to adhere to the substantial competent evidence rule, including Hart v. Held, 149 Fla. 33 , 5 So.2d 878 , cited by the District Court of Appeal, First District, in the present case, we announced, unequivocally we thought, adherénce ‘to the early rule placing in trial courts broad discretion of such firmness that it (the ruling) would not be disturbed except on clear showing of abuse * * *.’ We elaborated on this announcement by reference to the close contact of the judge with the trial, his opportunity therefore better to understand the ultimate deci

2020Id. at 733 .

2005The words of Justice Ervin as contained in his dissent in Lasky v. State Farm Insurance Co., 296 So.2d 9 (Fla.1974), with regard to an early analysis of "no-fault" sounded a warning that we have failed to acknowledge, which is evident today as the majority continues to permit the march against fundamental rights to carry on without even a respectable analysis.

1991We are cognizant of the decision in Aurora Enterprises, Inc. v. Department of Business Regulation, 395 So.2d 604 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), wherein an emergency order suspending a liquor license was quashed when a hearing had not been scheduled within forty days after the formal revocation proceedings had been commenced.

1964Although when such an attempt is made the record must be examined by the appellate court, the assailant cannot content himself simply to submit the record and expect the order to be upset if the reviewing body finds, in cold type without benefit of any of the circumstances known to the trial judge, and never to be known to the appellate court, that there appears to be some ‘substantial competent evidence’ supporting the verdict.” With reference to its earlier decisions the Supreme Court specifically held: “We adhere to the early rule placing in trial courts broad discretion of such firmness th

1962Plaintiff thereupon took an involuntary non-suit and moved the Court to dismiss the counterclaim, contending that it should fall with the non-suit under the doctrine of the early Florida cases of Buffington v. Quackenboss, 5 Fla. 196 ; and Clarke v. Wall, 5 Fla. 476 .

1962Plaintiff thereupon took an involuntary non-suit and moved the Court to dismiss the counterclaim, contending that it should fall with the non-suit under the doctrine of the early Florida cases of Buffington v. Quackenboss, 5 Fla. 196 ; and Clarke v. Wall, 5 Fla. 476 .

1876Under a subsequent-statute taking away all right to "a"possessory.action in the mortgagee, the rule in New York was condemned by the Michigan courts. ( 13 Mich. 23 .) After the most thorough examination-I am capable of giving the subject, _I .think the weight of authority is in favor of the Appointment.