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.
6 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1931–2006 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 |
|---|---|---|
Franqui v. Stategreen1 sentence2006In doing so, it found that while an inquiry was not required, "[w]e cannot agree with the dissenting opinion that the State's objection was insufficient to permit the trial court to make inquiry with respect to whether juror Diaz was being challenged for nonracial reasons." Franqui, 699 So.2d at 1335 (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Spiver Whitney Gordongreen1 sentence1987Slappy, 503 So.2d at 355 . "[T]he striking of a single black juror for a racial reason violates the Equal Protection Clause, even where other black jurors are seated, and even when there are valid reasons for the striking of some black jurors." U.S. v. Gordon, 817 F.2d 1538, 1541 (11th Cir.1987). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Slappy
green
1 sentence1996In State v. Sloppy, 522 So.2d 18 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1219 , 108 S.Ct. 2873 , 101 L.Ed.2d 909 (1988), our supreme court explained that once a proper objection has been made, the trial court must conduct an inquiry — first, to determine if the reason offered for the strike is neutral and reasonable, and second, not a pretext in order for the trial judge to permit the questioned challenge. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Andrews v. Adams
green
1 sentence1996In State v. Sloppy, 522 So.2d 18 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1219 , 108 S.Ct. 2873 , 101 L.Ed.2d 909 (1988), our supreme court explained that once a proper objection has been made, the trial court must conduct an inquiry — first, to determine if the reason offered for the strike is neutral and reasonable, and second, not a pretext in order for the trial judge to permit the questioned challenge. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Galloway Farms, Inc. v. Phoenix Mutual Life Insurance
green
1 sentence1996In State v. Sloppy, 522 So.2d 18 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1219 , 108 S.Ct. 2873 , 101 L.Ed.2d 909 (1988), our supreme court explained that once a proper objection has been made, the trial court must conduct an inquiry — first, to determine if the reason offered for the strike is neutral and reasonable, and second, not a pretext in order for the trial judge to permit the questioned challenge. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Men's International Professional Tennis Council v. Volvo North America Corp.
green
1 sentence1996In State v. Sloppy, 522 So.2d 18 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1219 , 108 S.Ct. 2873 , 101 L.Ed.2d 909 (1988), our supreme court explained that once a proper objection has been made, the trial court must conduct an inquiry — first, to determine if the reason offered for the strike is neutral and reasonable, and second, not a pretext in order for the trial judge to permit the questioned challenge. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Slappy v. State
green
1 sentence1987Slappy, 503 So.2d at 355 . "[T]he striking of a single black juror for a racial reason violates the Equal Protection Clause, even where other black jurors are seated, and even when there are valid reasons for the striking of some black jurors." U.S. v. Gordon, 817 F.2d 1538, 1541 (11th Cir.1987). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Love v. Williams
green
1 sentence1977The reason given for the rule is "that sales made by the sheriff ought not to be defeated; for if they are, no man will buy goods levied upon a writ of execution." 4 Fla. at 135 . | 1 | 1977–1977 |
Bailey v. Dobbins
green
1 sentence1943This presumption, however, does not arise where the legal title is taken in the name of some person for whom the purchaser is under a legal or moral obligation to provide.” Bailey v. Dobbins, 67 Nebraska 548, 93 N.W. 687 . | 1 | 1943–1943 |
Prichard v. Mulhall
green
2 sentences1931See Laird v. Price, 7 Mees. & W., 474; Prichard v. Mulhall, 127 Ia. 545 ; 103 N. W. 774 ; Old Colony R. 1931See Laird v. Price, 7 Mees. & W., 474; Prichard v. Mulhall, 127 Ia. 545 ; 103 N. W. 774 ; Old Colony R. | 1 | 1931–1931 |
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.