8 Florida opinions name it 1 courts 1986–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
Garcia v. Stategreen1 sentence2014See, e.g., Garcia v. State, 73 So.3d 823, 823-24 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011) (reversing trial court’s revocation for firearm possession where affidavit alleged different criminal activity). | 1 | 1 |
Turner v. Stategreen1 sentence2005See Turner v. State, 873 So.2d 480, 481 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Gordon v. State, 827 So.2d 346, 347 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Revear v. State, 497 So.2d 1337, 1337 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Sampson v. State, 375 So.2d 325, 325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). | 1 | 1 |
Sampson v. Stategreen1 sentence2005See Turner v. State, 873 So.2d 480, 481 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Gordon v. State, 827 So.2d 346, 347 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Revear v. State, 497 So.2d 1337, 1337 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Sampson v. State, 375 So.2d 325, 325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). | 1 | 1 |
Gordon v. Stategreen1 sentence2005See Turner v. State, 873 So.2d 480, 481 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Gordon v. State, 827 So.2d 346, 347 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Revear v. State, 497 So.2d 1337, 1337 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Sampson v. State, 375 So.2d 325, 325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). | 1 | 1 |
Revear v. Stategreen1 sentence2005See Turner v. State, 873 So.2d 480, 481 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Gordon v. State, 827 So.2d 346, 347 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Revear v. State, 497 So.2d 1337, 1337 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Sampson v. State, 375 So.2d 325, 325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). | 1 | 1 |
Cain v. Caingreen1 sentence1988As Judge Walden opined in his partial dissent in Cain v. Cain, 436 So.2d 367, 369 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983): Denying access to the Court based on the doctrine of unclean hands is an extreme sanction which ought to be invoked under only the most provocative or contumacious circumstances. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Belmont v. North Broward Hosp. Dist.
green
1 sentence2026Id. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
St. Petersburg Housing Auth. v. Jr Dev.
green
1 sentence2011This is based on the presumption that “litigants who have concluded a trial on the merits have presented all available, competent, material evidence in support of their case.” Id. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Miami International Hatcheries, Inc. v. General Mills, Inc.
green
1 sentence1997For example, in Miami Int’l Hatcheries, Inc. v. General Mills, Inc., 168 So.2d at 84 , this Court reversed an order granting a new trial because the “appellee did not timely or properly preserve as a ground for new trial the question of the admissibility of the questioned testimony and by its actions in developing and expanding on cross-examination the objectionable matter, waived the right to further urge such error.” Similarly, in Continental Baking Co. v. Slack, 556 So.2d at 756 , the appellate court reversed an order granting a new trial based on violation of an order in limine because the | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Continental Baking Co., Inc. v. Slack
green
1 sentence1997For example, in Miami Int’l Hatcheries, Inc. v. General Mills, Inc., 168 So.2d at 84 , this Court reversed an order granting a new trial because the “appellee did not timely or properly preserve as a ground for new trial the question of the admissibility of the questioned testimony and by its actions in developing and expanding on cross-examination the objectionable matter, waived the right to further urge such error.” Similarly, in Continental Baking Co. v. Slack, 556 So.2d at 756 , the appellate court reversed an order granting a new trial based on violation of an order in limine because the | 1 | 1997–1997 |
State v. Hamilton
green
1 sentence1991Furthermore, we find no error in the trial court’s denial of defendant’s motion for a new trial based on defense counsel’s statement, made orally at the sentencing hearing, that he had discovered a newspaper in the room in which the jury had deliberated. 1 See State v. Hamilton, 574 So.2d 124 (Fla.1991) (when unreasonable allegation of juror misconduct made, court need not conduct inquiry; defendant must allege facts establishing prima facie argument for prejudice). | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Robinson v. State
green
1 sentence1986In Robinson v. State, 462 So.2d 471 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984) ( Robinson II ), the defendant contended that in the interest of justice his conviction should be reversed and the case remanded for a new trial based on defense counsel's failure to timely file a motion for new trial, his only avenue after Tibbs for review of the weight of the evidence. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
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.