5 Florida opinions name it 1 courts 2001–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
Natarajan v. Horngreen2 sentences2020See Natarajan v. Horn, 402 So. 2d 596, 597 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). 2019See Natarajan , 402 So.2d at 597 . | 3 | 3 |
Regency Homes of Dade, Inc. v. McMillengreen1 sentence2001See Regency Homes of Dade, Inc. v. McMillen, 689 So.2d 1204 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)(con-cluding that the trial court was not required to apportion attorney’s fee award among various claims and counterclaims where the issues involved in defending the claims were intertwined with other issues in the case and attorney’s fees could not be reasonably apportioned). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Malone v. State
green
2 sentences2019"Florida courts have repeatedly held descriptions of property in mortgages sufficient despite minor mistakes and irregularities where the description of the property intended to be encumbered could be determined from a review of the entire instrument." Salam v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n , 233 So.3d 473 , 475 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (quoting Regions Bank v. Deluca , 97 So.3d 879 , 884-85 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) ). 2019"Florida courts have repeatedly held descriptions of property in mortgages sufficient despite minor mistakes and irregularities where the description of the property intended to be encumbered could be determined from a review of the entire instrument." Salam v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n , 233 So.3d 473 , 475 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (quoting Regions Bank v. Deluca , 97 So.3d 879 , 884-85 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) ). | 2 | 2019–2019 |
Allie v. Ionata
green
1 sentence2001Relying on Allie v. Ionata, 503 So.2d 1237 (Fla.1987), the trial court determined that the reformation claim was not barred by the statute of limitations because the request for reformation was a compulsory counterclaim to appellant's cross-claim for partition. | 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.
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.