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.
8 Florida opinions name it 3 courts 1969–2014 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 |
|---|---|---|
Smith v. Smithgreen1 sentence2014See Montello v. Montello, 961 So.2d 257, 258-59 (Fla.2007); Hollister v. Hollister, 965 So.2d 841, 349-50 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); Smith v. Smith, 902 So.2d 859, 862-63 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). | 1 | 1 |
Montello v. Montellogreen1 sentence2014See Montello v. Montello, 961 So.2d 257, 258-59 (Fla.2007); Hollister v. Hollister, 965 So.2d 841, 349-50 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); Smith v. Smith, 902 So.2d 859, 862-63 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). | 1 | 1 |
Ingram v. Stategreen1 sentence2013In Ingram v. State, the Fourth District applied the tenets of contract law to the plea process and opined that “when appellant refused to admit his guilt and insisted on making a best interests plea, there was no acceptance of the plea offer made by the trial judge, no meeting of the minds, and, hence, no binding plea agreement.” 763 So.2d 352, 353 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (holding that the trial court may include a condition in the plea offer that requires defendant to admit his guilt) (internal quotations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Simmons v. Schimmelgreen1 sentence1992See Simmons, 476 So.2d at 1345, n. 3 . | 1 | 1 |
London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Horngreen2 sentences1980See London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Horn, 206 Ill. 493 , 69 N.E. 526 (1903); Morgan v. Andrews, 107 Mich. 33 , 64 N.W. 869 (1895); W. 1980See London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Horn, 206 Ill. 493 , 69 N.E. 526 (1903); Morgan v. Andrews, 107 Mich. 33 , 64 N.W. 869 (1895); W. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Albrecht v. State
green
1 sentence1986A recent case exemplifying the inapplicability of the doctrine of res judicata to this case is Albrecht v. State, 444 So.2d 8 (Fla. 1984). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Morgan v. Andrews
green
2 sentences1980See London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Horn, 206 Ill. 493 , 69 N.E. 526 (1903); Morgan v. Andrews, 107 Mich. 33 , 64 N.W. 869 (1895); W. 1980See London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Horn, 206 Ill. 493 , 69 N.E. 526 (1903); Morgan v. Andrews, 107 Mich. 33 , 64 N.W. 869 (1895); W. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Producers Supply, Inc. v. Harz
green
2 sentences1978The order striking plaintiff’s prayer for attorney’s fees must also be reversed because there is nothing in the record to show the inapplicability of the principle stated in Producers Supply, Inc. v. Harz, 149 Fla. 594 , 6 So.2d 375 (1942). 1978The order striking plaintiff’s prayer for attorney’s fees must also be reversed because there is nothing in the record to show the inapplicability of the principle stated in Producers Supply, Inc. v. Harz, 149 Fla. 594 , 6 So.2d 375 (1942). | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Summerlin v. Tramill
green
1 sentence1975In Summerlin v. Tramill, supra, for example, a complaint alleging simple negligence had been properly dismissed prior to the repeal of the guest statute, but was held sufficient to state a “cause of action” after the repeal occurred. | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Davis v. Cuesta
green
2 sentences1969In holding that the last clear chance doctrine was not applicable, this court reiterated that "This doctrine is predicated upon the facts that defendant had knowledge of the situation in time to act upon it, and that the negligence of the person injured did not continue up to the very moment of the injury and was not a contributing and efficient cause of it." Again, in Davis v. Cuesta, 1941, 146 Fla. 471 , 1 So.2d 475 , this court emphasized the inapplicability of the doctrine in a case of concurrent negligence. 1969In holding that the last clear chance doctrine was not applicable, this court reiterated that "This doctrine is predicated upon the facts that defendant had knowledge of the situation in time to act upon it, and that the negligence of the person injured did not continue up to the very moment of the injury and was not a contributing and efficient cause of it." Again, in Davis v. Cuesta, 1941, 146 Fla. 471 , 1 So.2d 475 , this court emphasized the inapplicability of the doctrine in a case of concurrent negligence. | 1 | 1969–1969 |
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.