6 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 2016–2026 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Nader v. Florida Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehiclesgreen2 sentences2026It takes enormous court resources to do a good job of this. 8 Second, not every case merits a publication-quality opinion that is binding on future courts. 5 See Nader v. Fla. Dep’t. of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, 87 So. 3d 712, 724 (Fla. 2012) (“[T]here is a judicially imposed requirement that a circuit court must abide by precedent from another district court of appeal if no precedent exists from its own district.”). 6 Citation PCAs are not reviewable by the Florida Supreme Court so long as the cited cases are good law and not under review. 2019Saf. & Motor Veh. , 87 So.3d 712 , 724 (Fla. 2012) ("[T]here is a judicially imposed requirement that a circuit court must abide by precedent from another district court of appeal if no precedent exists from its own district."). | 3 | 3 |
STATE, COM'N ON ETHICS v. Sullivangreen1 sentence2026See Persaud v. State, 838 So. 2d 529, 532 (Fla. 2003); see also Jollie v. State, 405 So. 2d 418, 422 (Fla. 1981) (Boyd, J., dissenting) (“A citation of authority is not an opinion.”). 7 Accord State Comm’n on Ethics v. Sullivan, 430 So. 2d 928, 932 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (“The case law on the effect of a ‘per curiam, affirmed’ decision (PCA) is clear: It becomes the law of the case, is res judicata, but is not stare decisis.”). 8 Accord Committee on Per Curiam Affirmed Decisions, supra note 3, at x (“The PCA Committee is of the opinion that the present caseload facing each district court judge wo | 1 | 1 |
Whipple v. Stategreen1 sentence2026See Persaud v. State, 838 So. 2d 529, 532 (Fla. 2003); see also Jollie v. State, 405 So. 2d 418, 422 (Fla. 1981) (Boyd, J., dissenting) (“A citation of authority is not an opinion.”). 7 Accord State Comm’n on Ethics v. Sullivan, 430 So. 2d 928, 932 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (“The case law on the effect of a ‘per curiam, affirmed’ decision (PCA) is clear: It becomes the law of the case, is res judicata, but is not stare decisis.”). 8 Accord Committee on Per Curiam Affirmed Decisions, supra note 3, at x (“The PCA Committee is of the opinion that the present caseload facing each district court judge wo | 1 | 1 |
Persaud v. Stategreen1 sentence2026See Persaud v. State, 838 So. 2d 529, 532 (Fla. 2003); see also Jollie v. State, 405 So. 2d 418, 422 (Fla. 1981) (Boyd, J., dissenting) (“A citation of authority is not an opinion.”). 7 Accord State Comm’n on Ethics v. Sullivan, 430 So. 2d 928, 932 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (“The case law on the effect of a ‘per curiam, affirmed’ decision (PCA) is clear: It becomes the law of the case, is res judicata, but is not stare decisis.”). 8 Accord Committee on Per Curiam Affirmed Decisions, supra note 3, at x (“The PCA Committee is of the opinion that the present caseload facing each district court judge wo | 1 | 1 |
Jollie v. Stategreen1 sentence2026See Persaud v. State, 838 So. 2d 529, 532 (Fla. 2003); see also Jollie v. State, 405 So. 2d 418, 422 (Fla. 1981) (Boyd, J., dissenting) (“A citation of authority is not an opinion.”). 7 Accord State Comm’n on Ethics v. Sullivan, 430 So. 2d 928, 932 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (“The case law on the effect of a ‘per curiam, affirmed’ decision (PCA) is clear: It becomes the law of the case, is res judicata, but is not stare decisis.”). 8 Accord Committee on Per Curiam Affirmed Decisions, supra note 3, at x (“The PCA Committee is of the opinion that the present caseload facing each district court judge wo | 1 | 1 |
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. Pamela Ciccone, etc.green1 sentence2023Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Ciccone, 190 So. 3d 1028, 1042 (Fla. 2016) (Polson, J., dissenting) (“[T]o be in the Engle class and therefore get the benefit of the Engle class action jury’s findings, a plaintiff’s tobacco- related disease or condition must have manifested itself between the statute-of-limitations bar date of May 5, 1990, and the judicially imposed bar date of November 21, 1996.”); see also Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Russo, 175 So. 3d 681 (Fla. 2015); Fanali v. R.J. | 1 | 1 |
Frazier v. Philip Morris USA Inc.green1 sentence2023Reynolds Tobacco Co., 220 So. 3d 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017); Frazier v. Philip Morris USA Inc., 89 So. 3d 937, 939 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012). 3 COPD as early as the 1980s, and knew at the time that it was smoking- related. 4 Garcia responded, asserting that Mrs. Rodriguez was elderly at the time of her deposition, and that her memory of dates of events was diminished. | 1 | 1 |
Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Tina Russo, etc.green1 sentence2023Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Ciccone, 190 So. 3d 1028, 1042 (Fla. 2016) (Polson, J., dissenting) (“[T]o be in the Engle class and therefore get the benefit of the Engle class action jury’s findings, a plaintiff’s tobacco- related disease or condition must have manifested itself between the statute-of-limitations bar date of May 5, 1990, and the judicially imposed bar date of November 21, 1996.”); see also Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Russo, 175 So. 3d 681 (Fla. 2015); Fanali v. R.J. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Kelly v. State
green
2 sentences2019Section 775.21(4)(a), Florida Statutes, provides that a sexual offender who qualifies as a sexual predator "shall be designated as a 'sexual predator' ... and subject to registration ... and community and public notification." This provision means "that the trial court has no discretion to do otherwise." Kelly v. State , 795 So.2d 135 , 136 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). 2019Section 775.21(4)(a), Florida Statutes, provides that a sexual offender who qualifies as a sexual predator "shall be designated as a 'sexual predator' ... and subject to registration ... and community and public notification." This provision means "that the trial court has no discretion to do otherwise." Kelly v. State , 795 So.2d 135 , 136 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). | 2 | 2019–2019 |
Fanali v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.
neutral
1 sentence2023Reynolds Tobacco Co., 220 So. 3d 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017); Frazier v. Philip Morris USA Inc., 89 So. 3d 937, 939 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012). 3 COPD as early as the 1980s, and knew at the time that it was smoking- related. 4 Garcia responded, asserting that Mrs. Rodriguez was elderly at the time of her deposition, and that her memory of dates of events was diminished. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
S.M., etc. v. Florida Department of Children and Families
green
1 sentence2022Neither parent is able to be safely reunified with the child.” Father argues on appeal that the Department failed to prove that the termination of his parental rights was the least restrictive alternative when he was never provided a case plan and had never harmed the child. 3 3 We note the assertion in the Department’s brief that Father had been given 7 The least restrictive means test is a judicially imposed requirement that “is tied directly to the due process rights that must be afforded to a parent before his or her parental rights are terminated.” S.M., 202 So. 3d at 778 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Ciccone
green
1 sentence2016By viewing the question of whether a plaintiff is properly a member of the Engle class with “the benefit of hindsight from the vantage point of 2006,” Ciccone, 123 So. 3d at 613 , rather than looking to whether the plaintiff’s cause of action existed on November 21, 1996, the majority creates an entirely new definition of the word “manifestation” that has nothing to do with when the plaintiff’s tobacco-related cause of action accrued. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
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.