5 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 2001–2024 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Florida Department of Transportation v. Dorthy Schwefringhausgreen2 sentences2024See Pan- Am Tobacco, 471 So. 2d at 5–6; see also Schwefringhaus, 188 So. 3d at 844 . 2024See Pan- Am Tobacco, 471 So. 2d at 5–6; see also Schwefringhaus, 188 So. 3d at 844 . | 2 | 2 |
Pan-Am Tobacco v. Department of Correctionsgreen2 sentences2024See Pan- Am Tobacco, 471 So. 2d at 5–6; see also Schwefringhaus, 188 So. 3d at 844 . 2024See Pan- Am Tobacco, 471 So. 2d at 5–6; see also Schwefringhaus, 188 So. 3d at 844 . | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
S.M., etc. v. Florida Department of Children and Families
green
2 sentences2024S.M.’s Guiding Principles for the Least Restrictive Means Prong The least restrictive means element is a judicially implied 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 . 2024S.M.’s Guiding Principles for the Least Restrictive Means Prong The least restrictive means element is a judicially implied 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 . | 2 | 2024–2024 |
County of Brevard v. Miorelli Engineering
green
1 sentence2001Corp. v. Florida Dep't of HRS, 429 So.2d 391 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), a garnishment action; and County of Brevard v. Miorelli Eng'g, Inc., 703 So.2d 1049 (Fla.1997), wherein the supreme court extended the judicially implied waiver of sovereign immunity for express written contracts to include a waiver of immunity for a contractor's claim of breach of implied covenants or conditions contained within the scope of an express written contract. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
G & J Invs. Corp. v. Fla. Dept. of Health & Rehab. Services
green
1 sentence2001Corp. v. Florida Dep't of HRS, 429 So.2d 391 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), a garnishment action; and County of Brevard v. Miorelli Eng'g, Inc., 703 So.2d 1049 (Fla.1997), wherein the supreme court extended the judicially implied waiver of sovereign immunity for express written contracts to include a waiver of immunity for a contractor's claim of breach of implied covenants or conditions contained within the scope of an express written contract. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.