green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
32.8 score
“the standard of review for orders on summary judgment is de novo.”
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
D.L. v. Community Based Care of Brevard, Inc., D/B/A Brevard Family Partnership, the Devereaux Foundation, Inc., D/B/A Devereaux Florida and Barbara Jones
the standard of review for orders on summary judgment is de novo.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
PIERRE RICHARD STANICLAS v. DERIC L. BOGRAN
Necessarily, ‘the particular matter must be fully litigated and determined in a contest that results in a final decision of a court of competent jurisdiction.’” (quoting Bradenton Group, Inc. v. State, 970 So. 2d 403, 408 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007))); Bistline v. Rogers, 215 So. 3d 607, 611 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (“[Section 768.72, Florida Statutes] requires the trial court to act as a gatekeeper and precludes a claim for punitive damages where there is no reasonable evidentiary basis for recovery.”). 2
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
PIERRE RICHARD STANICLAS v. ALEXANDER GAMARNIK
Necessarily, ‘the particular matter must be fully litigated and determined in a contest that results in a final decision of a court of competent jurisdiction.’” (quoting Bradenton Group, Inc. v. State, 970 So. 2d 403, 408 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007))); Bistline v. Rogers, 215 So. 3d 607, 611 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (“[Section 768.72, Florida Statutes] requires the trial court to act as a gatekeeper and precludes a claim for punitive damages where there is no reasonable evidentiary basis for recovery.”). 2
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
MICHAEL RIDARD v. MASSA INVESTMENT GROUP, LLC
Necessarily, “the particular matter must be fully litigated and determined in a contest that results in a final decision of a court of competent jurisdiction.” Bradenton Group, Inc. v. State, 970 So. 2d 403, 408 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (emphasis added).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Larry L. Masino
Bradenton Grp., Inc. v. State, 970 So.2d 403, 408-11 (Fla. Dist.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Wharton v. Shiver (In Re Shiver)
The courts have emphasized that collateral estoppel precludes relitigation of issues actually litigated in a prior proceeding.”) (citations omitted)(emphasis in original); Bradenton Group, Inc. v. State, 970 So.2d 403, 408-09 (Fla.Dist.Ct. *124 App.2007) (quoting City of Oldsmar v. State, 790 So.2d 1042 , 1046 n. 4 (Fla.2001)).
Antwan OFFORD, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
3D07-2292.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Nov 7, 2007.
Gersten, C.J., and Cortiãas, J., and Schwartz, Senior Judge.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Antwan Offord, in proper person.
Bill McCollum, Attorney General, for appellee.
Before GERSTEN, C.J., and CORTIÑAS, J., and SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Galindez v. State, 955 So.2d 517 (Fla.2007); Rouse v. State, 965 So.2d 201 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007).