IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.:
|
|
- Aubrey Kennedy
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: ARNALDO VELEZ, an individual, TAYLOR, BRION, BUKER & GREENE, a general partnership, vs. Petitioners, BIRD LAKES DEVELOPMENT CORP., a Panamanian corporation, Respondent. / RESPONDENT S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION On Review from the District Court of Appeal Third District of Florida Respectfully submitted, HALL, DAVID AND JOSEPH, P.A Brickell Avenue, Penthouse Miami, Florida Tel: Fax: Attorneys for Respondent
2 Table of Contents Table of Citations... iii Statement of the Case and Facts... 1 Argument... 2 I. This Court Lacks Jurisdiction over this Matter. 2 II. No Conflict Exists and No Conflict Can Be Demonstrated... 3 A. The Third District s Opinion Does Not Expressly and Directly Conflict with Layne Dredging Co. v. Regus, Inc., 622 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) B. The Third District s Opinion Is Also Not in Conflict with Watson v. G&C Ford Company, 293 So. 2d 101 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1974) C. The Letter Attached to the Petitioners Brief Does Not Establish Conflict Jurisdiction Conclusion Certificate of Compliance...10 Certificate of Service ii
3 Table of Citations CASES PAGES Department of Revenue v. Johnston, 442 So.2d 950 (Fla. 1983) 3 Gonzalez v. Mulreany, 375 So.2d 621 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).. 5 Gonzalez v. Turner, 427 So.2d 1123 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).. 4 Kyle v. Kyle, 139 So.2d 885 (Fla. 1962)... 3 Layne Dredging Company v. Regus, Inc., 622 So.2d 7 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1993)...3, 4, 10 Randle-Eastern Ambulance Service v. Vasta, 360 So.2d 68 (Fla Ryder System, Inc. v. O'Connor, 369 So.2d 980 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)... 4 Watson v. G & C Ford Company, 293 So.2d 101 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)...3, 7, 10 CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS PAGES Art. v, 3(b) (3)... 2 COURT RULES... PAGES Rule Rule 9.030(a) (2) (A) (iv)... 2 Rule 9.120(d)... 9 iii
4 STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS On August 29, 1994, Bird Lakes Development Corporation ( Bird Lakes ) filed a legal malpractice action against Defendants Arnaldo Velez ( Velez ), Taylor, Brion, Buker & Greene (the Taylor Brion law firm ) and others. (R.Vol. I, 1-20). On May 13, 1996, after a substantial amount of discovery was completed in the Bird Lakes v. Velez action, the Home Insurance Company, the insurer of the Taylor Brion law firm and Velez, filed an action in the Circuit Court of Miami-Dade County, Florida seeking declaratory judgment and other relief. (R. Vol. IV, ). The Home Insurance Company s complaint sought to void the policy of insurance issued to the Taylor Brion law firm. Bird Lakes was named as a party to this action along with James Feltman, as liquidating trustee of Aerial Transit Company. (Id.). In response, Bird Lakes filed its answer, affirmative defenses, counterclaim, cross claim and third party claims. (R. Vol. IV, ) In early 1999, the Home Insurance Company settled the claim brought by James Feltman, as liquidating trustee for Aerial Transit Company, against the Taylor Brion law firm (R. Vol. V, ; ). In response to this settlement, Bird Lakes filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings contending that the consummation of the Feltman settlement constituted a waiver of the Home Insurance Company s right to contest coverage. The 1
5 trial court agreed and entered a judgment in favor of Bird Lakes on its counterclaim. (R. Vol. V, 1006). On June 10, 1999, the trial court entered an order giving effect to the voluntary dismissal filed by Home Insurance Company but leaving intact the Bird Lakes counterclaim, cross claims and third party claims. Thereafter, the consolidated case proceeded. 1 On February 1, 2002, the trial court held a status conference and later entered an Order on Status Conference which provided that the cross claims and third party claim brought by Bird Lakes did not survive the voluntary dismissal filed by the Home Insurance Company. Accordingly, the cross claims and third party claims are not a part of the [Bird Lakes v. Velez] suit. (R. Vol. V, ). By its opinion dated April 16, 2003, the Third District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court and concluded that the cross claims and third party claims filed by Bird Lakes remained pending. ARGUMENT I. This Court Lacks Jurisdiction over this Matter. This Court has no jurisdiction over this matter and should dismiss the same. In order to establish conflict jurisdiction, the Petitioners must satisfy the dictates of Art. V, 3(b)(3) of the Florida Constitution and Rule 9.030(a)(2)(A)(iv) which 1 The Home Insurance matter was consolidated with the Bird Lakes v. Velez matter by order dated March 31,
6 require that an express and direct conflict be established as a condition to this Court s exercise of jurisdiction. Where the cases are distinguishable in controlling factual elements or if the points of law settled by the cases are not the same, no conflict arises. Department of Revenue v. Johnston, 442 So.2d 950 (Fla. 1983) (Where cause was distinguishable on its facts from those cited in conflict, Supreme Court would discharge jurisdiction.). II. No Conflict Exists and No Conflict Can Be Demonstrated. The Petitioners have failed to demonstrate any conflict between the Third District Court of Appeal s decision below and either Watson v. G & C Ford Company, 293 So.2d 101 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1974). The Petitioners cite the Layne Dredging case for the proposition that cross claims do not survive dismissal of the main action and cite the Watson case for the proposition that third-party claims do not survive dismissal of the main action. These cases, however, do not support the broad propositions stated by the Petitioners. A. The Third District s Opinion Does Not Expressly and Directly Conflict with Layne Dredging Co. v. Regus, Inc., 622 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). The opinion in Layne reveals little by way of facts and even less by way of procedural history. What the opinion does reveal is that it is wholly distinguishable from the facts of this case and does not present this Court with an express and direct conflict in need of resolution. 3
7 In Layne, the CIT Group filed suit against several defendants including Layne and Regus, Inc. Regus, Inc. answered the complaint and thereafter filed a motion to amend its answer to assert a cross claim against Layne. Unlike the facts of this case, the proposed cross claim was not filed and the opinion leaves the nature of the cross claim a mystery. CIT then filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of the complaint. After the filing of the dismissal, apparently long after, the lower court entered an order allowing Regus, Inc. to file its cross claim against Layne. The Second District Court of Appeal found the trial court to have erred. The Layne court stated [A]ny purpose Regus may have had to transfer its liability through a cross claim to Layne was nullified at the moment when CIT accomplished the voluntary termination of its lawsuit. 622 So.2d at 8. The facts of Layne reveal that the lower court had no jurisdiction to adjudicate the cross claim because the action was no longer pending by virtue of the voluntary dismissal. The law is quite clear that once a party files a proper notice of voluntary dismissal, the court is automatically divested of jurisdiction. Randle-Eastern Ambulance Service v. Vasta, 360 So.2d 68 (Fla.1978); Ryder System, Inc. v. O'Connor, 369 So.2d 980 (Fla. 4 th DCA 1979) It appears that Regus cross claim must have sounded in indemnity, contribution or some other type of claim designed to shift the liability for the CIT claims from Regus to Layne. 4
8 That being the case, it is obvious that the dismissal of the CIT complaint obliterated the need for the cross claim s attempt to shift liability; if there can be no liability, none can be shifted. In this case, the facts are completely distinguishable from Layne. Bird Lakes, along with the lawyer and law firm defendants, was sued by the Home Insurance Company which sought a declaratory judgment that the Home Insurance Company properly rescinded its policy of insurance. Bird Lakes filed a counterclaim against the Home Insurance Company seeking a declaratory judgment that the Home Insurance Company was obligated to provide a defense to the lawyer and law firm defendants for the Bird Lakes claims. Bird Lakes also filed a cross claim which arose from the subject matter of the Home Insurance Company claims as well as third party claims arising from the subject of the Home Insurance claim. The Third District Court of Appeal s holding below, that the dismissal of the Home Insurance Company complaint, did not require the dismissal of the cross claims and third party claims is not in conflict with Layne and is distinguishable both factually and legally. Rule 1.170(g) provides, in part, as follows: Cross claim against Co-Party. A pleading may state as a cross claim any claim by one party against a co-party arising out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of either the original action or a counterclaim therein,.. (Emphasis supplied). 5
9 The Bird Lakes cross claims and third party claims are clearly related to the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the Home Insurance Action. The application of Rule by the Third District is not inconsistent with Layne and Watson and no conflict is presented. Rule 1.170(g) does not limit cross claims to those seeking indemnity or contribution and therefore dependent upon the main action. Rather, the rule specifically provides that a wider variety of claims are properly asserted as cross claims. The holding in Layne was premised on the theory that any purpose Regus, Inc. had to transfer its liability to Layne was extinguished when CIT dismissed its complaint. The Layne court s logic is based upon the perception that the Regus, Inc. cross claim was an effort to shift liability or an attempt at contribution or indemnification. Because the facts of this case are substantially different than the facts presented in Layne, no conflict can be shown. B. The Third District s Opinion Is Also Not in Conflict with Watson v. G&C Ford Company, 293 So. 2d 101 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1974). Watson, just as Layne, presents a fact pattern much different from this case. In Watson, Toner, filed a complaint against G & C Ford Company and its insurer, Universal Insurance Company. G & C Ford and Universal filed a third party complaint against Watson. The matter came to trial and at the end of Toner s case, the trial court directed a verdict in favor of G 6
10 & C Ford. As a consequence of that ruling, the court dismissed with prejudice G & C Ford and Universal s third party complaint against Watson, which was not at issue and was not involved in the trial terminated by the directed verdict. Toner appealed the judgment against him. There was no appeal taken of the dismissal of the third party claims. On appeal, the appellate court reversed the trial court s directed verdict and remanded for a new trial. Importantly, the third-party plaintiffs never appealed the dismissal of the third-party claims and never requested that the third-party claims be reinstated upon reversal of the directed verdict. Following remand, Toner s action against G & C Ford and Universal proceeded to trial. The third party claims were never reinstated and were not pursued. The second trial resulted in the entry of a judgment against the defendants. One week after the judgment, the trial court, without notice, entered an order vacating its order which dismissed the third-party complaint with prejudice. Watson appealed the order of reinstatement. The appellate court reversed the order of reinstatement and held that because the third party claim against Watson was not renewed until after the retrial of Toner s claim for damages, the claims did not survive. The court reasoned that Watson was prejudiced because he did not have an opportunity to exercise his rights under Rule 1.180, i.e. raising defenses before a judgment had been rendered in the original lawsuit. Importantly, the court also held that because no appeal was 7
11 taken of the prior dismissal, said dismissal was a final order which precluded such a reinstatement. The facts of Watson are wholly distinguishable from the facts of this case. In Watson, and like Layne, the third-party plaintiff alleged their claims after the resolution of the dispute between the defendant and the plaintiff, or, attempted to assert the same when to do so would have unfairly prejudiced the rights of the third party defendants. In the instant case, the third-party claim and the cross claim were filed well before the dismissal of the Home Insurance Company complaint. As a result, unlike Layne, the trial court, indisputably, had jurisdiction over the cross claims. In addition, unlike Watson, all of the third party defendants defenses were available and unaffected. The facts of this case as well as the Third District Court of Appeal s application of the law to those facts, reveal that no conflict with either Layne or Watson is presented. C. The Letter Attached to the Petitioners Brief Does Not Establish Conflict Jurisdiction. As a threshold matter, the letter from counsel for Bird Lakes to the trial court should not be considered by this Court and it is not properly part of the Petitioners appendix. Rule 9.120(d) clearly precludes attaching any documents to the brief on jurisdiction other than a conformed copy of the decision of the district court of appeal. Accordingly, the letter should not be considered. 8
12 The Petitioner s also contend that Bird Lakes counsel admitted in a November 3, 1999 letter to the trial judge that the cross claims and third party claims were no longer pending. In that letter, in which Bird Lakes counsel candidly withdrew a motion for attorney s fees, he stated that the only issue remaining for determination in this action is whether Bird Lakes is entitled to recover the attorneys fees and costs... By using the term this action, Bird Lakes counsel was clearly referring to Bird Lakes counterclaim against the Plaintiff and not to the cross claim and third-party claim, which had not yet adjudicated and which had no effect on the motion for attorney s fees discussed in the letter. 9
13 CONCLUSION The Petitioners have failed to demonstrate any express and direct conflict between the decision of the Third District Court of Appeal below and either Layne Dredging Company v. Regus, Inc., 622 So.2d 7 (Fla. 2 nd DCA 1993) or Watson v. G & C Ford Company, 293 So.2d 101 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1974). As a result, this Court should decline to accept jurisdiction over this matter and dismiss the same. Respectfully submitted, HALL, DAVID AND JOSEPH, P.A. Attorneys for Respondent 1428 Brickell Avenue Penthouse Miami, Florida Telephone: (305) Facsimile: (305) By: CHRISTOPHER M. DAVID Florida Bar No.:
14 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WE HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing brief complies with Rule 9.210(a)(2) and is printed in Courier New 12-point font. HALL, DAVID AND JOSEPH, PA 1428 Brickell Avenue Penthouse Miami, Florida Telephone: (305) By: CHRISTOPHER M. DAVID Florida Bar No.: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served by mail this day of July 2003 to: RODERICK COLEMAN, ESQ., Coleman & Associates, P.A., 122 Minorca Avenue, Coral Gables, Florida HALL, DAVID AND JOSEPH, PA 1428 Brickell Avenue Penthouse Miami, Florida Telephone: (305) By: CHRISTOPHER M. DAVID Florida Bar No.: A:\Respondent, Bird Lakes, Brief on Jurisdiction.wp 11
Supreme Court of Florida
Supreme Court of Florida CASE NO. BASIK EXPORTS & IMPORTS, INC., Petitioner, v. PREFERRED NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent. ON PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No. SC08- Lower Tribunal No. 3D BEATRICE PERAZA, Appellant, vs. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. SC08- Lower Tribunal No. 3D07-477 BEATRICE PERAZA, Appellant, vs. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION, Appellee. On Review of a Decision of the Third District
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2011
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2011 Opinion filed December 07, 2011. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D11-334 Lower Tribunal No.
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed April 13, 2016. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D15-1047 Lower Tribunal No. 08-3100 Florida Insurance
More informationOF FLORIDA. Appeals from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jeri Beth Cohen, Judge. Pollack & Rosen, P.A., and Mark E. Pollack, for appellants.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DISPOSED OF. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT JANUARY TERM, A.D. 2006 METRO BUILDING MATERIALS CORP. and MANUEL
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC THIRD DISTRICT CASE NO. 3D BRASS & SINGER, D.C., P.A., A/A/O MILDRED SOLAGES, Petitioner,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC06-283 THIRD DISTRICT CASE NO. 3D05-951 BRASS & SINGER, D.C., P.A., A/A/O MILDRED SOLAGES, Petitioner, vs. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, A Florida corporation,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA. Petitioner, S.C. Case No.: SC DCA Case No.: 5D v. L.T. Case No.
Filing # 12738024 Electronically Filed 04/21/2014 04:09:09 PM RECEIVED, 4/21/2014 16:13:38, John A. Tomasino, Clerk, Supreme Court STATE FARM FLORIDA INSURANCE COMPANY, IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed November 1, 2017. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D17-725 Lower Tribunal No. 15-14380 Lucky Star Horses,
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT SHERRY CLEMENS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN CLEMENS, deceased, Appellant, v. PETER NAMNUM, M.D., individually, PETER
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Petitioner, L.T. Nos.: 3D PETITIONER S JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA MIGUEL A. FONSECA, v. Petitioner, Case No.: SC09-732 L.T. Nos.: 3D08-1465 06-18955 06-10636 MERCURY INSURANCE COMPANY OF FLORIDA, Respondent. / PETITIONER S JURISDICTIONAL
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA JOHN D. DUDLEY, Petitioner, CASE NO.: SC 07-1747 vs. DCA CASE NO.: 5D06-3821 ELLEN F. SCHMIDT, Respondent. / PETITIONER S AMENDED JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF Richard J. D
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC THIRD DISTRICT CASE NO. 3D COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH CENTER, INC., a/a/o ERLA TELUSNOR,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC11-726 THIRD DISTRICT CASE NO. 3D09-3370 COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH CENTER, INC., a/a/o ERLA TELUSNOR, Petitioner, vs. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, A Florida
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC08-1. MARK FREEMAN and RAPHAEL RODRIGUEZ. Petitioners, vs. BLOSSOM COHEN and ABRAHAM COHEN, Respondents
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC08-1 MARK FREEMAN and RAPHAEL RODRIGUEZ Petitioners, vs. BLOSSOM COHEN and ABRAHAM COHEN, Respondents RESPONDENTS ANSWER BRIEF ON JURISDICTION ALVIN N. WEINSTEIN
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM v. Case No. 5D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM 2001 STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Case No. 5D00-2993 PASHA YENKE, Appellee. / Opinion filed
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIFTH DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. v. CASE NO. 5D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIFTH DISTRICT OF FLORIDA BLACKBOX, INC., Appellant, v. CASE NO. 5D00-0000 JAMES L. DOE and MARCIA E. DOE, et al., Appellees. / ON APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH
More informationOF FLORIDA. ** Appellant, ** vs. CASE NO. 3D ** LOWER TRIBUNAL NO TRIPP CONSTRUCTION, INC., ** Appellee. **
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DISPOSED OF. AUTO OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY, IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT JULY TERM, A.D. 2002 Appellant,
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed October 13, 2016. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D14-2986 Lower Tribunal No. 99-993 Mario Gonzalez,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No. 1D
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. 1D07-6027 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, AS RECEIVER FOR AMERICAN SUPERIOR INSURANCE COMPANY, INSOLVENT, vs. Petitioner, IMAGINE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT JOSEPH MANZARO, Appellant, v. LINDA D'ALESSANDRO, Appellee. No. 4D16-3951 [November 1, 2017] Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida, January Term, A.D. 2013
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, January Term, A.D. 2013 Opinion filed February 6, 2013. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D12-132 Lower Tribunal No.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC THIRD DISTRICT CASE NO. 3D
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC11-726 THIRD DISTRICT CASE NO. 3D09-3370 COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH CENTER, INC. (a/a/o Erla Telusnor), vs. Petitioner, UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA. CASE NO: SC v. THIRD DCA CASE NO.: 3D Lower Tribunal No.:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA RICHARD GRAY, Plaintiff/Petitioner, CASE NO: SC04-1579 v. THIRD DCA CASE NO.: 3D03-1587 Lower Tribunal No.: 98-27005 DANIEL CASES, Defendant/Respondent. PETITIONER
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. KUBICKI DRAPER, LLP, a law firm, Appellee. No. 4D17-2889 [January 23, 2019] Appeal from the Circuit
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed November 29, 2017. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D16-2706 Lower Tribunal No. 14-30116 Fist Construction,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. L.T. CASE NO.: 2D v. L.T. CASE NO.: 2D THE HARTFORD FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Connecticut corporation,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY, a Michigan Corporation, Petitioner, CASE NO.: SC04-1977 L.T. CASE NO.: 2D03-2188 v. L.T. CASE NO.: 2D03-3182 THE HARTFORD FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY,
More informationAppellant, Lower Court Case No.: CC O
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTO- MOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, CASE NO.: CVA1-06 - 19 vs. CARRIE CLARK, Appellant, Lower Court Case
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2013
MAY, J. DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2013 PALM BEACH POLO HOLDINGS, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, a Texas corporation,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA PETITIONER S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
HERBERT KINDL, Petitioner, IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. v. 5 th DCA CASE NO. 5D10-1722 UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, Respondent. / PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW OF A DECISION
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC THIRD DCA CASE NO.: 3D06-458
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA THIRD DCA CASE NO.: 3D06-458 CUSTER MEDICAL CENTER, (a/a/o Maximo Masis), vs. Petitioner, UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent. / PETITIONER=S REPLY BRIEF On
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Petitioner, CASE NO. v. DCA CASE NO. 3D Lower Tribunal Case No
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA SANDRA CARTER, Petitioner, CASE NO. v. DCA CASE NO. 3D10-326 Lower Tribunal Case No. 07-882 MONROE COUNTY, Respondent. / PETITIONER CARTER S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION On Review
More informationCASE NO. SC L.T. CASE NO. 1D JAMON A. JOHNSON and CHAKA JOHNSON, Petitioners, UNIVERSAL PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,
Electronically Filed 09/09/2013 11:18:02 AM ET RECEIVED, 9/9/2013 11:18:39, Thomas D. Hall, Clerk, Supreme Court 122373 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC13-1427 L.T. CASE NO. 1D12-0891 JAMON
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA BRUCE BERNSTEIN, Petitioner, v. CASE NO. SC05-1586 HARVEY GOLDMAN, Respondent. / RESPONDENT S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION On Petition To Invoke Discretionary Review Of A Decision
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed August 02, 2017. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D16-2672 Lower Tribunal No. 12-15813 Dev D. Dabas and
More informationCASE NO. 1D Nathan Robert Prince of Law Office of Adam Ruiz, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA CLINT E. BODIE, v. Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED CASE NO. 1D11-5731
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC SERVICE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, vs. OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION AND
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC11-299 SERVICE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, vs. OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION AND THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMISSION, Appellees. BRIEF ON JURISDICTION OF APPELLEES
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA STATE OF FLORIDA PETITIONERS AMENDED JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA STATE OF FLORIDA RIVIERA ALMERIA RIVERIA BILTMORE, LLC, and RIVIERA SEVILLA, LLC, CASE NO.: SC 11-503 DCA CASE NO: 3D10-1197 L.T. Case No.: 08-2763 CA 40 v. Petitioners,
More informationSUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. v. Lower Tribunal No.: 2D RESPONDENTS AMENDED RESPONSE TO PETITIONERS JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA AKERMAN, SENTERFITT & EIDSON, P.A. a Florida professional service corporation, and JOSEPH RUGG, an individual, Petitioners, CASE NO. SC06-2312 v. Lower Tribunal No.: 2D05-4688
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed May 10, 2017. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D16-926 Lower Tribunal No. 13-10766 Kendall South Medical
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NUMBER SC
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NUMBER SC04-1690 4 TH DCA CASE NUMBER: 4D03-2921 HYUNDAI MOTOR COMPANY and HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA CORPORATION, vs. Defendants/Petitioners, ANTHONY J. FERAYORNI, as Personal
More informationSUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. v. Case No. SC DCA Case No. 2D WILMA SMITH, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA FOREMOST INSURANCE COMPANY and AMERICAN FEDERATION INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioners, v. Case No. SC04-2003 DCA Case No. 2D03-286 WILMA SMITH, individually, and on behalf of all others
More informationIn the Supreme Court of Florida
In the Supreme Court of Florida CASE NO.: SC10-116 STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. GILDA MENENDEZ, FABIOLA G. LLANES, FABIOLA P. LLANES and ROGER LLANES, Respondents. DISCRETIONARY
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED EXPLORER INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant,
More informationSUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC Fourth DCA Case No. 4D09-728
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC11-263 Fourth DCA Case No. 4D09-728 MCLAUGHLIN ENGINEERING COMPANY, a Florida Corporation, JERALD MCLAUGHLIN, individually, and CARL E. ALBREKTSEN, individually, vs.
More informationSUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Supreme Court Case No.: District Court Case No.: 3D HACIENDA LOMA LINDA, Petitioner,
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Supreme Court Case No.: District Court Case No.: 3D05-1331 HACIENDA LOMA LINDA, Petitioner, v. THE SCOTTS COMPANY, SCOTTS-SIERRA HORTICULTURAL PRODUCTS COMPANY, and BOB SANTANA,
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed January 3, 2018. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D17-1086 Lower Tribunal No. 09-92831 GEICO General
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA. Petitioner, Case No.: SC LT Case No.: 1D PETITIONER'S AMENDED BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA GREGG L. BLANN, Vs. Petitioner, Case No.: SC08-197 LT Case No.: 1D07-100 ANNETTE BLANN, Respondent, / PETITIONER'S AMENDED BRIEF ON JURISDICTION William S. Graessle
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No. Lower Tribunal No. 3D
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. Lower Tribunal No. 3D 05-1400 AMEDEX INSURANCE COMPANY, CINCINNATI EQUITABLE INSURANCE COMPANY, and FERNANDO NAVA d/b/a NAVA & COMPANY, Petitioners, vs. KAREM ELENA
More informationSTATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT CW **********
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT CW06-959 WILLIAM DeSOTO, ESTELLA DeSOTO, AND DICKIE BERNARD VERSUS GERALD S. HUMPHREYS, ILLINOIS NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, AND UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE
More informationPEGGY WARD CASE NO.: CVA LOWER COURT CASE NO.: 06-CC-3986 Appellant,
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA PEGGY WARD CASE NO.: CVA1 06-46 LOWER COURT CASE NO.: 06-CC-3986 Appellant, v. RAK CHARLES TOWNE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA KATHERINE ANNE SMITH, v. Appellant/Cross-Appellee, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF
More informationCase 9:16-cv BB Document 42 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 9:16-cv-80987-BB Document 42 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 1 of 9 THE MARBELLA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, and NORMAN SLOANE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA v. Plaintiffs,
More informationNON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 ROX-ANN REIFER, Appellant IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. WESTPORT INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee No. 321 MDA 2015 Appeal from the Order
More informationOF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT JULY TERM, 2004
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DISPOSED OF. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT JULY TERM, 2004 LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE ** INSURANCE COMPANY, **
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA HERBERT KINDL, PETITIONER, UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, RESPONDENT. CASE NO.: SC11-146
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA HERBERT KINDL, PETITIONER, v. UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, RESPONDENT. CASE NO.: SC11-146 L.T. NO.: 5D10-1722; 09-CA-5209-A5-L ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. DCA Case No. 2D L.T. Case No CA
William O. Murtagh, M.D., Plaintiff/Appellant, vs. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. DCA Case No. 2D-10-246 L.T. Case No. 09-3769-CA Lynn Hurley, Defendant/Appellee. / PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER/APPELLANT,
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT January Term 2013
GROSS, J. DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT January Term 2013 GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. JAMES M. HARVEY, Respondent. No. 4D12-1525 [January 23, 2013]
More informationFINAL ORDER AFFIRMING TRIAL COURT. the trial court s Final Judgment entered July 16, 2014, in favor of Appellee, Emergency
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA PROGRESSIVE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, CASE NO.: 2014-CV-000054-A-O Lower Case No.: 2011-SC-008737-O Appellant, v.
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM v. Case No. 5D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM 2007 PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Case No. 5D07-2045 JOIE REED AND GREGORY GREENE, Respondents.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE H. DAVID MANLEY, ) ) No. 390, 2008 Defendant Below, ) Appellant, ) Court Below: Superior Court ) of the State of Delaware in v. ) and for Sussex County ) MAS
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. SC Fifth DCA Case No. 5D10-19, Lake County
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. SC11-1282 Fifth DCA Case No. 5D10-19, Lake County Upon Petition for Discretionary Review Of A Decision of the Fifth District Court of Appeal CARDIOVASCULAR ASSOCIATES
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT JAMES T. GELSOMINO, Appellant, v. ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY and BROWN & BROWN, INC., Appellees. No. 4D14-4767 [November 9, 2016] Appeal
More informationIn the Supreme Court of Florida
In the Supreme Court of Florida CASE NO.: SC11-258 STATE FARM FLORIDA INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. LLOYD BEVERLY and EDITH BEVERLY, Respondents. ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE SECOND DISTRICT COURT
More informationIn the Supreme Court of Florida
In the Supreme Court of Florida CASE NO.: SC09-401 STATE FARM FLORIDA INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. CHAD GOFF and CAROL GOFF, Respondents. ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT. v. Case No. 5D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED JENNIFER L. PALMA, Appellant, v. Case No.
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS ANDERSON MILES, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED May 6, 2014 v No. 311699 Wayne Circuit Court STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE LC No. 10-007305-NF INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT JOSEPH VIERA, ALICIA VIERA, PAIGE VIERA, JOEY VIERA, LYNN DEMCHAK VIERA and JOSEPH VIERA AND LYNN DEMCHAK on behalf of CHRISTOPHER DEMCHAK,
More informationSupreme Court of Florida
Supreme Court of Florida No. SC09-1914 DONALD WENDT, et al, Petitioners, vs. LA COSTA BEACH RESORT CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., Respondent. PER CURIAM. [June 9, 2011] This case is before the Court for
More informationSUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC th DCA CASE NO. 4D L.T. CASE NO. CACE (13)
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC03-1597 4th DCA CASE NO. 4D02-368 L.T. CASE NO. CACE 99-12131 (13) ASAL PRODUCTS, INC., a Florida corporation, vs. Petitioner, OFFICE PAVILION SOUTH FLORIDA, INC., a
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM v. Case No. 5D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM 2007 THE PLUMBING SERVICE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Case No. 5D06-1586 TRAVELER'S CASUALTY & SURETY COMPANY, etc., Appellee.
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NO CA APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ATTALA COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI
E-Filed Document Jun 30 2016 11:18:49 2015-CA-01772 Pages: 11 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BROOKS V. MONAGHAN VERSUS ROBERT AUTRY APPELLANT CAUSE NO. 2015-CA-01772 APPELLEE APPEAL
More informationCommonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals
RENDERED: MARCH 4, 2011; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2009-CA-002208-ME M.G.T. APPELLANT APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE DOLLY W. BERRY,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. CASE NO. SC Lower Tribunal Case No. 3D ELIEZIER LEAL and CLARA LEON, Petitioners,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC09-2312 Lower Tribunal Case No. 3D09-821 ELIEZIER LEAL and CLARA LEON, Petitioners, v. DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, Respondent. ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
More informationARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION II No. CV-15-293 UNIFIRST CORPORATION APPELLANT V. LUDWIG PROPERTIES, INC. D/B/A 71 EXPRESS TRAVEL PLAZA APPELLEE Opinion Delivered December 2, 2015 APPEAL FROM THE SEBASTIAN
More informationJURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF RESPONDENT
Electronically Filed 07/17/2013 02:38:44 PM ET RECEIVED, 7/17/2013 14:43:35, Thomas D. Hall, Clerk, Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC13-1244 BENJAMIN and BETH ERGAS, FOURTH DISTRICT
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2009
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2009 Opinion filed July 15, 2009. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D08-2376 Lower Tribunal No. 07-5548
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT HOCKING COUNTY
[Cite as Sturgill v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, 2013-Ohio-688.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT HOCKING COUNTY DENVER G. STURGILL, : : Plaintiff-Appellant, : Case No. 12CA8 : vs. :
More informationThird District Court of Appeal
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed February 21, 2018. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D17-891 Lower Tribunal No. 14-27810 Wickberto Marin,
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT. v. Case No. 5D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED JULIAN PLUCK, Appellant, v. Case No. 5D18-1742
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STERLING BANK & TRUST, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED October 11, 2011 v No. 299136 Oakland Circuit Court MARK A. CANVASSER, LC No. 2010-107906-CK Defendant-Appellant.
More informationIN THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT Case No.: SC Petitioner, BRENDA W. NIX,
----------------------------------------------- -------- IN THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT Case No.: SC06-1326 ----------------------------------------------- -------- RICHARD A. NIX, Petitioner, v. BRENDA
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION. v. CIVIL ACTION NO.
Alps Property & Casualty Insurance Company v. Turkaly et al Doc. 50 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION ALPS PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No. SC L.T. No. 3D A.M. BEST ROOFING, INC., Petitioner, RICHARD KAYFETZ, Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. SC03-131 L.T. No. 3D00-3278 A.M. BEST ROOFING, INC., Petitioner, v. RICHARD KAYFETZ, Respondent. ON NOTICE TO INVOKE DISCRETIONARY JURISDICTION TO REVIEW DECISION
More information! CASENOTE JAMES GRAFTON RANDALL, ESQ. LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS October 13, 2011
! CASENOTE JAMES GRAFTON RANDALL, ESQ. LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS October 13, 2011 INSURER MAY INTERVENE IN PENDING LAWSUIT WHEN ANSWER OF INSURED HAS BEEN STRICKEN AND DEFAULT ENTERED AND MAY ASSERT ALL DEFENSES
More informationNOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED OF FLORIDA
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT JAMES MOTZENBECKER, ELIZABETH MOTZENBECKER, CHELSEA ACKERMECHT,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC RESPONDENTS BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA STATE FARM FLORIDA INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, vs. CASE NO.: SC09-401 CHAD GOFF and CAROL GOFF, Respondents, / RESPONDENTS BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
More informationAUTOMOBILE INSURANCE; NAMED DRIVER EXCLUSION:
HEADNOTES: Zelinski, et al. v. Townsend, et al., No. 2087, September Term, 2003 AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE; NAMED DRIVER EXCLUSION: The Named Driver Exclusion is valid with respect to private passenger automobiles,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION CASE NUMBER SC
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION CASE NUMBER SC07-2071 APPELLATE CASE NO: 3D06-1175 SUSAN PARKER FEIN, Circuit Case Numbers: 03-13889 CA 22 03-11222 CA 22 04-10875 CA 22 Consolidated
More informationJ. Kirby McDonough and S. Douglas Knox of Quarles & Brady, LLP, Tampa, for Appellee.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA LINDA G. MORGAN, v. Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED CASE NO. 1D15-2401
More informationSUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA NATIONWIDE MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE : COMPANY, : : Petitioner, : CASE NO.: SC : v. : : HOWARD J. BEVILLE, JR., et al., : : Respondent. : : : ON DISCRETIONARY
More informationRUSSELL L. HALL, CASE NO.: CVA LOWER COURT CASE NO.: CEB
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA RUSSELL L. HALL, CASE NO.: CVA1 07-07 LOWER COURT CASE NO.: CEB 2007-614622 v. Appellant, ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA, Appellee.
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed May 10, 2017. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D16-2044 Lower Tribunal No. 16-3100 Companion Property
More informationSTATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF MEDINA ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
[Cite as Novak v. State Farm Ins. Cos., 2009-Ohio-6952.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF MEDINA ) MARTHA NOVAK C. A. No. 09CA0029-M Appellant v. STATE FARM
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed November 21, 2018. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D17-1603 Lower Tribunal No. 14-24174 Judith Hayes,
More informationIN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA. Appellant :
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Northeast Bradford School District, : : Appellant : : v. : No. 2007 C.D. 2016 : Argued: June 5, 2017 Northeast Bradford Education : Association, PSEA/NEA : BEFORE:
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT RECEIVED, 6/14/2017 4:56 PM, Joanne P. Simmons, Fifth District Court of Appeal MICHAEL CONNOLLY, Plaintiff/Appellant, Case No.: 5D17-1172
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT. v. Case No. 5D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC STACI LEVY, as Personal Representative of THE ESTATE OF BRANDON LEVY. Petitioner, vs.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC01-2786 STACI LEVY, as Personal Representative of THE ESTATE OF BRANDON LEVY Petitioner, vs. FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, a Florida corporation, Respondent.
More informationSUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA
REL: 09/01/2017 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate
More informationCase 3:09-cv N-BQ Document 201 Filed 05/16/17 Page 1 of 13 PageID 3204
Case 3:09-cv-01736-N-BQ Document 201 Filed 05/16/17 Page 1 of 13 PageID 3204 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD S OF LONDON
More informationIN THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE CIRCUIT COURT ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY. Circuit Court Case No.
IN THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE CIRCUIT COURT ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY Warren Redlich, Appellant vs. Circuit Court Case No. 2016-000045-AC-01 State of Florida, Appellee /
More information