90.304
Presumption affecting the burden of proof defined.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
90.304 Presumption affecting the burden of proof defined.—In civil actions, all rebuttable presumptions which are not defined in s. 90.303 are presumptions affecting the burden of proof.
History.—s. 1, ch. 76-237; s. 1, ch. 77-77; s. 22, ch. 78-361; s. 1, ch. 78-379.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 34
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1982–2024 · leading case: Universal Insurance Co. of North America v. Warfel
Universal Insurance Co. of North America v. Warfel (2012)
“1 Universal also moved to apply section 90.304, Florida Statutes (2007), and requested that the jury be instructed that the presumption of correctness as articulated in 627.”
Warfel v. Universal Insurance Co. of North America (2010)
“Universal also asked the trial court to determine that section 90.304, Florida Statutes (2007), allowed a jury instruction based on section 627.”
Beal Bank, SSB v. Almand and Associates (2001)
“[18] The presumption we adopt is a presumption affecting the burden of proof pursuant to section 90.304, Florida Statutes (2000), thus shifting the burden to the creditor to prove by a preponderance of evidence [19] that a tenancy by the entireties *59 was not created.”
Owens v. Publix Supermarkets, Inc. (2001)
“[10] The presumption is one affecting the burden of proof pursuant to section 90.304, Florida Statutes (2000). As we explained in Beal Bank, SSB v.”
Jennings v. Dade County (1991)
“Although an ex parte communication with a quasi-judicial tribunal makes its final action voidable, rather than void per se, the presumption which is drawn from the fact of the improper conduct, is applied to promote a strong social policy and is sufficient evidence to convince…”
Hack v. Janes (2004)
“§ 90.304, Fla. Stat. (2002); see Charles E.”
Jensen v. Anderson (In re Anderson) (2016)
“debtor and a third-party creditor (other than the financial institution into which the deposits have been made), if the signature card of the account does not expressly disclaim the tenancy by the entireties form, of ownership, a presumption arises that a bank account titled in…”
DEPT. OF AGR. & CONSUMER SERV. v. Bonanno (1990)
“Section 90.304, Florida Statutes (1987), defines the second type of rebuttable presumption: In civil actions, all rebuttable presumptions which are not defined in s.”
Department of Transp., Div. of Admin. v. Jirik (1986)
“As we have noted above, if the land is actually occupied or in use, the unity of the use is the chief criterion in determining whether *1257 contiguous parcels are one unit or separate and independent.”
INS. CO. OF ST., PA v. Estate of Guzman (1982)
“303, Florida Statutes (1979), provides: In a civil action or proceeding, unless otherwise provided by statute, a presumption established primarily to facilitate the determination of the particular action in which the presumption is applied, rather than to implement public…”
Thomasena Mitchell v. Miami Dade County aka MDPD (Intracoastal) etc. (2016)
“Section 90.304, Florida Statutes, provides “[i]n civil actions, all rebuttable presumptions which are not defined in section 90.”
Gross v. Zimmerman (2016)
“See § 90.304, Fla. Stat. (2014). “A presumption affecting the burden of proof .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.