Supreme Court announced doctrine in Florida

1953The courts are bound to uphold a statute, unless it is clearly made to appear beyond a reasonable doubt that it is unconstitutional.' "And in the case of Hunter v. Owens, 80 Fla. 812 , 86 So. 839 , our Supreme Court used this language: "`The wisdom, necessity, expediency, feasibility, and probable success of a governmental statutory project are not subject to judicial review, where the statute is not clearly a violation or evasion of organic law and has substantial basis in a lawful public purpose within the scope of the police power.' "In the Maxcy, Inc., v. Mayo case, 103 Fla. 552 , 139 So.

1953The courts are bound to uphold a statute, unless it is clearly made to appear beyond a reasonable doubt that it is unconstitutional.' "And in the case of Hunter v. Owens, 80 Fla. 812 , 86 So. 839 , our Supreme Court used this language: "`The wisdom, necessity, expediency, feasibility, and probable success of a governmental statutory project are not subject to judicial review, where the statute is not clearly a violation or evasion of organic law and has substantial basis in a lawful public purpose within the scope of the police power.' "In the Maxcy, Inc., v. Mayo case, 103 Fla. 552 , 139 So.

2025In Long, 183 So. 3d at 346 , the supreme court announced the test courts are to use when a person who has pleaded guilty raises a claim of newly discovered evidence.

2004Id.

1996In Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), the Supreme Court announced this doctrine: [Government officials performing discretionary function[s] generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person should have known.

1996In Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), the Supreme Court announced this doctrine: [Government officials performing discretionary function[s] generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person should have known.

1982Its order does not mention the phrase "just valuation," although we perceive it to be the key to the entire case. [6] In Burns v. Butscher, 187 So.2d 594 (Fla. 1966), which was reaffirmed in District School Board of Lee County v. Askew, 278 So.2d 272, 274 (Fla. 1973), the supreme court announced a principle that is still very important to the people of Florida in view of the continued existence of homestead exemption: [A]ssessments of a level below 100% cannot be tolerated.

1981In Hedges v. State, 172 So.2d 824 (Fla. 1965), the Supreme Court announced the rule that a reinstruction on manslaughter must include a reinstruction on excusable and justifiable homicide.

1981Failure to do so, the court said, leaves the jury with "an incomplete, and, potentially misleading instruction." Id. at 826 .

1976See also Vilord v. Jenkins, Fla.App.2d 1969, 226 So.2d 245 ; Foley v. Morris, Fla.App.2d 1976, 325 So.2d 37 .

1976In City of Miami v. Brooks, Fla. 1954, 70 So.2d 306 , the Supreme Court announced the rule that the statute of limitations attaches when there has been notice of an invasion of the legal rights of the plaintiff or he has been put on notice of his right to a cause of action.

1953The courts are bound to uphold a statute, unless it is clearly made to appear beyond a reasonable doubt that it is unconstitutional.' "And in the case of Hunter v. Owens, 80 Fla. 812 , 86 So. 839 , our Supreme Court used this language: "`The wisdom, necessity, expediency, feasibility, and probable success of a governmental statutory project are not subject to judicial review, where the statute is not clearly a violation or evasion of organic law and has substantial basis in a lawful public purpose within the scope of the police power.' "In the Maxcy, Inc., v. Mayo case, 103 Fla. 552 , 139 So.

1953The courts are bound to uphold a statute, unless it is clearly made to appear beyond a reasonable doubt that it is unconstitutional.' "And in the case of Hunter v. Owens, 80 Fla. 812 , 86 So. 839 , our Supreme Court used this language: "`The wisdom, necessity, expediency, feasibility, and probable success of a governmental statutory project are not subject to judicial review, where the statute is not clearly a violation or evasion of organic law and has substantial basis in a lawful public purpose within the scope of the police power.' "In the Maxcy, Inc., v. Mayo case, 103 Fla. 552 , 139 So.