IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA STATE OF FLORIDA PETITIONERS AMENDED JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF 1
|
|
- Ross Daniel
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA STATE OF FLORIDA RIVIERA ALMERIA RIVERIA BILTMORE, LLC, and RIVIERA SEVILLA, LLC, CASE NO.: SC DCA CASE NO: 3D L.T. Case No.: CA 40 v. Petitioners, CDC BUILDERS, INC., Respondent. / PETITIONERS AMENDED JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF 1 DANIELS, KASHTAN, DOWNS, ROBERTSON & McGIRNEY Attorneys for Petitioners 3300 Ponce de Leon Boulevard Coral Gables, FL Tel: (305) Fax:(305) By: RICHARD A. DANIELS, ESQ. Fla. Bar No.: MADELYN S. LOZANO, ESQ. Fla. Bar. No.: JEREMY C. DANIELS, ESQ. Fla. Bar No.: Amended as to Service List Only 1
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. STATEMENT OF CASE..1 II. III. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT.2 ARGUMENT.3 A. THE THIRD DCA S EXERCISE OF CERTIORARI JURISDICTION CONFLICTS WITH OPINIONS OF OTHER COURTS...3 B. THE THIRD DCA MISAPPLIED LIEN LAW PRECEDENT AND THEREBY CREATED CONFLICT.8 IV. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 10 V. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 11 2
3 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES , Fla. Stat. (2006) , Fla. Stat. (2006) 1, 2, 5, 6, , Fla. Stat. (2006)..1 Allstate v. Kaklamanos, 843 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 2003) 3 Arab Termite & pest Control of Fla v. Jenkins, 409 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 1942).10 Belmont Lakes, LLC v. Rooney, 980 So.2d 580 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)..4 CDC Builders, Inc. v. Riviera Almeria, et al, 51 So. 3d 510 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)..1 Ceco Corp. v. Goldberg, 219 so. 2d 475 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969).8 Custer Medical Center v. United Automobile, 2010 WL (Fla. 2010).6 Haines City Community v. Heggs, 658 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 1995) 6, 7 Ivey v AllState Insurance, 774 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 2000).3, 6 Wolf Creek Land Development, Inc. v. Masterpiece Homes, Inc., 942 So. 2d 995 (Fla. 5 th DCA 2006).3, 4, 6 Trytek v. Gale Industries, Inc., 3 So. 3d 1194 (Fla. 2009) 3, 8, 9 Zalay v. Ace Cabinets of Clear Water, 700 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)..3, 8, 9 3
4 I. Statement of the Case and Facts The Third District s opinion in CDC Builders, Inc. v. Riviera Almeria, et al, 51 So. 3d 510 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010), if left to stand, would create a new level of certiorari review and improperly disrupt the construction lien law. In a case where there was no established precedent on the issue before it, the Third District created new grounds for certiorari review of a partial summary judgment by holding that a contractor can violate sections and of Florida s Construction Lien Law and face criminal sanctions but still maintain its lien rights. The case involves a dispute between general contractor, CDC BUILDERS, INC. ( CDC ) and property owners RIVIERA BILTMORE, LLC and RIVIERA SEVILLA, LLC (collectively Riviera ). At issue is CDC s practice of routinely drawing more money from Riviera than what it was paying out to its subcontractors. In order to carry out this plan, CDC filed sworn interim payment applications that CDC knew contained false information about the payment status of its subcontractors. The trial court granted Riviera s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and discharged CDC s lien claims because of its violations of section , Fla. Stat. (2006), which is contained in Part I of Chapter 713, Florida Statutes (2007). Section prohibits the furnishing of an 1
5 affidavit containing false information about the payment status of subcontractors. CDC s breach of contract action, which seeks the same damages as sought in the lien claims, remains pending. The Third DCA treated CDC s appeal of the partial summary judgment as a Petition for Writ of Certiorari. It then improperly granted certiorari and vacated the partial summary judgment based on its disagreement with the trial court s first-impression interpretation of chapter 713 and the Third DCA s own improper factual determinations on disputed evidence. II. Summary of Argument The Third DCA improperly exercised its certiorari jurisdiction to vacate a partial summary judgment on the grounds that it disagreed with the circuit court s interpretation of Florida s Construction Lien Law in a case where there is no established precedent. The trial court had ruled that based on the undisputed fact that CDC had filed knowingly false, sworn pay applications, in violation of section and the intent of the whole of construction lien law, CDC could not enforce any lien rights and could only proceed on its breach of contract claim. The Third DCA disagreed and held that section violations do not prohibit lien rights. There is no clearly established law on the issue. Thus, there were no grounds for certiorari 2
6 review, and the decision below is in express and direct conflict with Ivey v. AllState Insurance, 774 So.2d 679 (Fla. 2000) and Wolf Creek Land Dev., Inc. v. Masterpiece Homes, Inc., 942 So.2d 995 (Fla. 5 th DCA 2006) which stand for the proposition that a district court of appeal should not grant a certiorari merely because it disagrees with the circuit court s interpretation of a statute where there is no established precedent on the issue. In addition, the Third DCA failed to interpret chapter 713 as a whole or apply fairness and equity in its application of the lien law, thereby misapplying Zalay v. Ace Cabinets of Clear Water, 700 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) and Trytek v. Gale Industries, Inc., 3 So. 3d 1194 (Fla. 2009). III. Argument A. The Third DCA s Exercise of Certiorari Jurisdiction Conflicts with Opinions of Other Courts There is express and direct conflict between the Third DCA s decision here and this Court s decision in Ivey, 774 So. 2d at 679 and the Fifth DCA s opinion in Wolf Creek, 942 So.2d at 995. These cases stand for the proposition that a court should not interpret a statute on certiorari review where there is no controlling precedent to apply. In Ivey, this Court held that a DCA s mere disagreement with the trial court s interpretation of the applicable law is an improper basis for common law certiorari. 774 So. 2d at 683; see Allstate v. Kaklamanos, 843 3
7 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 2003)(reiterating that the Third DCA inappropriately exercised certiorari review in Ivey where it merely disagreed with the circuit court s interpretation of the applicable statute). Although Ivey, as well as Kaklamanos, deal with second tier certiorari review, the principles have been extended to certiorari review of non-final orders entered by a circuit court. See Belmont Lakes, LLC v. Rooney, 980 So.2d 580 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)(on review of a non-final order granting summary judgment the departure from the essential requirements of the law necessary for the issuance of a writ of certiorari is something more than a simple legal error ). In Wolf Creek, 942 So.2d at 995, a case involving the interpretation of the lien statute, the Fifth DCA refused to grant certiorari when there was no clearly established principle of law on the statutory issue presented. In that case, the trial court had granted a developer s motion for judgment on the pleadings on the first count of Wolf Creek s complaint in which it sought to foreclose a construction lien. Id. at 997. A second count for breach of contract remained to be litigated. The Fifth DCA found that there had been no adequate showing that the trial court s order departed from the essential requirements of law since there was no case law on the statutory interpretation issue. As stated in the decision: The statutory issue raised by Wolf Creek in the present case is certainly debatable, but there appears to be no case law on the matter 4
8 that has been pointed out by either side or that has been disclosed by our own independent research. As the order is not the subject of a clearly established principle of law, certiorari is not available to review it. Id. (emphasis in the original). Contrary to the Fifth DCA in Wolf Creek and this Court in Ivey, the Third DCA in the instant case granted common law certiorari for the express reason that we cannot agree with the trial court that either statute [section or section ] or chapter 713 interpreted as a whole would justify the discharge of an otherwise valid lien. Opinion at 6. As stated in page 4 of the Opinion, the trial court in CDC Builders found there were no questions of material fact that CDC Builders had filed false interim payment applications in violation of section , which prohibits the making or furnishing of a written statement in the form of an affidavit, whether or not under oath, containing false information about the payment status of subcontractors. As noted in the Third DCA s opinion, the trial court determined that chapter 713, when read as a whole, requires a contractor to comply with all provisions contained therein. Opinion at 6. See ( a contractor who complies with the provisions of this part shall have a lien ). The trial court then found that by violating section , CDC Builders had not strictly complied with all of the provisions of chapter 713 and therefore ordered the discharge of the liens. Id. at 4. 5
9 The Third DCA did not agree with the trial court s interpretation and application of chapter 713. Id. The court noted that such violations expose an individual to criminal sanctions only and that as a statutory creature, the construction lien law must be strictly construed. Id. at 6-7. There is no controlling precedent establishing that a contractor s violation of section results in a failure to acquire a lien or a discharge of a construction lien as the trial court held. Likewise, prior to the Third DCA s decision in this case there was no case law establishing that such a violation cannot result in the discharge of a construction lien. As in Wolf Creek, there was no established law on the statutory issue before the court on certiorari. Under Ivey and Wolf Creek, the Third DCA s disagreement with the trial court on the issue of first impression was not a proper basis for common law certiorari. See Custer Med. Ctr. v. United Automobile, 2010 WL (Fla. 2010)(circuit court could not have violated the essential requirements of law when principle of law had never existed). The Third DCA attempted to justify its exercise of certiorari jurisdiction by stating its concern with the deleterious impact the trial court s interpretation of chapter 713 would have upon the construction industry as a whole as liens could be subject to attack for inaccuracies or simple mathematical errors. Opinion at 5, 7. See Haines City Community v. 6
10 Heggs, 658 So.2d 523 (Fla. 1995)(in granting common law certiorari, the district courts of appeal should not be as concerned with the mere existence of legal error as much as with the seriousness of the error). The Third DCA s concern is entirely misplaced. The liens were discharged for intentional acts, not for simple mathematical errors. Section prohibits a prospective lienor from knowingly and intentionally filing a written statement in the form of an affidavit containing false information about the payment status of subcontractors. (emphasis supplied). By the statute s very terms, if the payment applications contain simple mathematical errors then the element of intent will not be met and there could be no finding of a section violation. Moreover, the trial court did not commit a serious error resulting in a miscarriage of justice for the remainder of the case when it discharged a construction lien because of the intentional violation of a statutory provision that carries criminal sanctions. [T]he district court s exercise of its discretionary certiorari jurisdiction should depend on the court s assessment of the gravity of the error and the adequacy of other relief. Haines City, 658 So. 2d at 531. CDC can still pursue its contractual remedies for the same damages. Its loss of lien rights for filing false affidavits in violation of section is remediable upon final appeal. 7
11 B. The Third DCA Misapplied Lien Law Precedent and Thereby Created Conflict. The instant decision misapplies Zalay, 700 So.2d at 15 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) and Trytek v. Gale Industries, Inc., 3 So. 3d 1194 (Fla. 2009), and thus creates conflict. As stated in the opinion at issue, the trial court found that chapter 713, when read as a whole, requires a contractor to comply with all provisions contained therein. However, this interpretation neither comports with the statutory language nor with precedent in this state. Opinion at 6. This holding directly conflicts with Zalay, where a property owner argued that the construction lien imposed on its property could not include a subcontractor s attorney s fees and costs. The Second DCA noted that nothing in this statute expressly provides a lien for attorney s fees and costs. However: As a creature of statute, construction lien laws must be strictly construed Nevertheless, these statutes must be construed as a whole in light of the legislatures intended policies. Ceco Corp. v. Goldberg, 219 So.2d 475 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969). The attorneys fees awarded under section are not an element of damages, but are taxed as part of costs. We see no reason why the costs involved in a construction lien action should not be included with the lien. (emphasis added). The Third DCA cites Zalay for the premise that the construction lien law shall not be subject to a rule of liberal construction in favor of any party. 8
12 However, it failed to follow the statutory construction as in Zalay by failing to construe chapter 713 as a whole. Its holding fails to give effect to section , which provides that a contractor has to comply with the provisions of Part I of chapter 713 in order to have a lien. Instead, the Third DCA found [w]hile a violation of either section or would expose an individual to criminal sanctions, it would not justify the discharge or invalidation of an otherwise valid lien. Opinion at 6. Furthermore, sections and protect an owner from parting with construction funds under false pretenses and exposing themselves to liens and other claims. Recently, this Court stated that the dual purpose of the lien law in protecting both the laborer and owner seems to evidence a legislative intent to emphasize fairness and equity in actions brought pursuant to the lien law. Trytek, 3 So.3d at Instead of emphasizing fairness and equity, the Third DCA unjustly favored the contractor over an owner out of some unfounded concern that simple mathematic errors, which were not the facts presented, would result in the discharge of a lien. The Third DCA refused to interpret chapter 713 as a whole in spite of the legislative intent to protect an owner from fraudulently departing with funds. In so doing, the decision conflicts Zalay and Trytek. This misapplication of precedent creates a conflict, which this 9
13 Court should invoke its jurisdiction to resolve. Arab Termite & Pest Control of Fla v. Jenkins, 409 So.2d 1039 (Fla. 1942). Conclusion Accordingly, based on the foregoing, it is respectfully requested that this honorable Court invoke its jurisdiction pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.030(a)(2)(A)(iv), to take jurisdiction of this case and vacate the decision of the Third DCA. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was mailed via U.S. Mail and ed this 23 rd of March, 2011 to all Counsel on the attached Service List. DANIELS, KASHTAN, DOWNS, ROBERTSON & McGIRNEY Attorneys for Petitioners 3300 Ponce de Leon Boulevard Coral Gables, FL Tel: (305) Fax:(305) By: RICHARD A. DANIELS, ESQ. Fla. Bar No.: MADELYN SIMON LOZANO Fla. Bar. No.: JEREMY C. DANIELS, ESQ. Fla. Bar No.: (Certificate of Compliance to follow on the next page) 10
14 Certificate of Compliance with Fla. R. App. P In accordance with Fla. R. App. P (a)(2), the undersigned certifies that this brief complies with the font requirements of Fla. R. App. P By: JEREMY C. DANIELS, ESQ. Fla. Bar No.:
15 SERVICE LIST Michael J. Kurzman, Esq. Tiffany M. Hurwitz, Esq. Siegfried, Rivera, Lerner, De La Torre & Sobel, P.A West Broward Blvd. Suite 250 Plantation, Florida (954) Telephone (954) Facsimile Bruce Alan Weil, Esq. Boies, Schiller & Flexner, LLP Bank of America Tower, Suite S.E. 2 nd Street Miami, Florida (305) Telephone (305) Facsimile bweil@bsfllp.com P:\EDSISS\DOCS\1009\5655\AA1355.DOC 12
16 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA STATE OF FLORIDA RIVIERA ALMERIA RIVERIA BILTMORE, LLC, and RIVIERA SEVILLA, LLC, CASE NO.: SC DCA CASE NO: 3D L.T. Case No.: CA 40 v. Petitioners, CDC BUILDERS, INC., Respondent. / APPENDIX TO PETITIONERS JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF 13
17 INDEX OF APPENDIX TO PETITIONERS JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF Conformed Copy of Third District Court of Appeal s Decision in CDC Builders, Inc. v. Riviera Almeria, LLC, et al. 14
RESPONDENT CDC BUILDERS, INC. S RESPONSE TO PETITIONERS RIVIERA BILTMORE, LLC AND RIVIERA SEVILLA LLC S JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF
2070625 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA RIVIERA ALMERIA, LLC, RIVIERA BILTMORE, LLC, RIVIERA SEVILLA, LLC, Petitioner(s) CASE NO.: SC11-503 LOWER TRIBUNAL CASE NOS: 3D10-1197, 08-2763CA10 vs. CDC BUILDERS,
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
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 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. 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 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 informationSupreme 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
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 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. 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 informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.:
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.
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 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 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 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. 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 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 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 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 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 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 STATE FARM FLORIDA INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Case No. 5D06-3147 JESSICA LORENZO F/K/A JESSICA DIBBLE, ET AL.,
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 informationBILLY JOE L. MCFARLAND, ESQUIRE Florida Bar No: Del Prado, Suite A Cape Coral, Florida (239) Attorney for Petitioner
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA SUPREME COURT CASED NO. SC11-7 SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL CASE NO. 2D09-3774 LEE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT CASE NO. 07-CA-011255 ADVANTAGE BUILDERS
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 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 THE LEXINGTON CLUB COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, INC., and THE LEXINGTON CLUB VILLAS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellants, v. LOVE MADISON,
More informationOF FLORIDA. A Writ of Certiorari to the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Appellate Division, Kevin Emas, Diane Ward, Israel Reyes, Judges.
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, A.D. 2006 CORAL IMAGING SERVICES, A/O/A VIRGILIO REYES,
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 informationIN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF FLORIDA ASSOCIATED UNIFORM RENTAL & LINEN SUPPLY, INC., Petitioner, Case No. SC09-134 3DCA Case No.: 3D05-2130 v. RKR MOTORS, INC., Respondent. On Discretionary Review From
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 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. 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 informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. v. CASE NO. SC ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA RICHARD DUCHARME, Petitioner, v. CASE NO. SC05-290 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. / ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF
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. 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 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 informationv. CASE NO.: CVA Lower Court Case No.: 2003-SC-598-O
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA REGIONAL MRI OF ORLANDO, INC., as assignee of Lorraine Gerena, Appellant, v. CASE NO.: CVA1 09-38 Lower Court Case
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 informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC05-856
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC05-856 RICHARD SNELL, Vs. Appellant/Petitioner ALLSTATE INDEMNITY CO., et al. Appellee/Respondent. / PETITIONER S THIRD AMENDED BRIEF ON JURISDICTION BOIES, SCHILLER
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. CASE NO. SC d DCA CASE NO. 3D05-951
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC06-283 3d DCA CASE NO. 3D05-951 BRASS & SINGER, P.A., (a/o/a Mildred Solages) vs. Petitioner, UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent. / PETITIONER=S
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 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 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 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 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D. C. Docket No. 1:09-cv JLK. versus
Merly Nunez v. GEICO General Insurance Compan Doc. 1116498500 Case: 10-13183 Date Filed: 04/03/2012 Page: 1 of 13 [PUBLISH] MERLY NUNEZ, a.k.a. Nunez Merly, IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
More informationIN THE FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA Security First Insurance Company, Case No. 1D14-1864 Lower Case No. 149960-14 Appellant, v. State of Florida, Office of Insurance Regulation,
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 2008 PROGRESSIVE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Case No. 5D07-2495 STAND-UP MRI OF ORLANDO, as assignee of EUSEBIO
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 informationAMENDED BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF JURISDICTION
KARIM GHANEM, vs. Petitioner, STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. / IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC05-1860 Lower Tribunal No: 4D03-743 AMENDED BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF JURISDICTION [PETITION FOR WRIT
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 FOR THE STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC
IN THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC05-2231 RENEE HELD, Petitioner, L. T. CASE NO. 4D04-1432 and KENNETH HELD Respondent. AMENDED JURISDICTIONAL ANSWER BRIEF OF RESPONDENT TERRENCE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO: DCA CASE NO.: 2D
Electronically Filed 04/18/2013 01:20:31 PM ET RECEIVED, 4/25/2013 15:07:31, Thomas D. Hall, Clerk, Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA HARCO NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, vs. Petitioner, LARRY
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 informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC05-1459 DR. ROBERT D. SIMON, M.D., P.A. a/a/o ERIC HON, Petitioner, v. PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent. On Review From The District Court of
More informationSTAND-UP MRI OF ORLANDO, CASE NO.: CVA
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA STAND-UP MRI OF ORLANDO, CASE NO.: CVA1 06-58 a/a/o Eusebio Isaac, LOWER COURT CASE NO.: 2005-SC-4899-O Appellant,
More informationIn this PIP case, State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Co. (State Farm), the Defendant below,
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. WORLD HEALTH WELLNESS, INC. a/a/o Glenda Pinero, Appellee.
More informationIN THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT
IN THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT STATE FARM MUTUAL ) AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE ) COMPANY, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) Fla. S.Ct. Case No. SC06-1006 vs. ) ) Fla. 2d DCA Case No. 2D05-491 CLEARVIEW IMAGING, L.L.C., ) d/b/a,
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM v. Case No. 5D05-935
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM 2006 STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Case No. 5D05-935 RONNIE T. WIGGINS, Respondent.
More informationRespondents. / ANSWER BRIEF ON THE MERITS OF RESPONDENT, THE OHIO CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY
JAMES D. STERLING and CAROLYN STERLING, as Parents and Natural Guardians of JAMES D. STERLING, JR., a minor, and JAMES D. STERLING and CAROLYN STERLING, Individually, vs. Petitioners, STATE OF FLORIDA
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 informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. v. Case No.: SC ANSWER BRIEF ON JURISDICTION OF RESPONDENTS BARBARA REIS AND JOSEPH REIS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, a foreign corporation, Petitioner, v. Case No.: SC06-962 BARBARA REIS and JOSEPH REIS, Respondents. / ANSWER BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
More informationSUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA DCA CASE NO.: 5D08-98
SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA CHARLENE M. BIFULCO CASE NO: SC09-172 DCA CASE NO.: 5D08-98 Petitioner, v. PATIENT BUSINESS & FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. Respondent. BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT
More informationPETITIONER'S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. SC04-2422 Lower Court Case No. 1D03-4547 JEROME LOVETT, : : Petitioner, : : v. : : MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, : : Respondent. : : PETITIONER'S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION RICHARD
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 94,135 (CI 98-CI 1137)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 94,135 (CI 98-CI 1137) STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellant, vs. VALIDATION OF NOT EXCEEDING $35,000,000 OSCEOLA COUNTY, OSCEOLA COUNTY, FLORIDA, a FLORIDA TOURIST DEVELOPMENT
More informationSUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. v. Case No. SC th DCA Case No. 5D
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA D.M.T., Appellant, v. Case No. SC12-261 5 th DCA Case No. 5D09-3559 T.M.H., Appellee. / APPELLEE S VERIFIED OBJECTION TO APPELLANT S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE INITIAL
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL THIRD DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL THIRD DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA RECEIVED, 12/8/2016 1:37 PM, Mary Cay Blanks, Third District Court of Appeal LBMP HOLDINGS, LLC and AJK 21ST STREET, LLC, CASE NO.: 3D16-2433
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 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 informationCASE NO. 1D Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and J. Clifton Cox, Special Counsel, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA VERIZON BUSINESS PURCHASING, LLC, v. Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2010
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2010 ALEXANDER G. SARIS, Appellant, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, STATE FARM FLORIDA INSURANCE COMPANY, HUSTRIBERTO
More informationBEFORE THE FLORIDA JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION STATE OF FLORIDA INQUIRY CONCERNING A JUDGE
Filing # 29552579 E-Filed 07/13/2015 11:29:39 AM BEFORE THE FLORIDA JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION STATE OF FLORIDA INQUIRY CONCERNING A JUDGE SC13-1333 LAURA M. WATSON, NO. 12-613 / RECEIVED, 07/13/2015
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE THIRD DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE THIRD DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 3D16-2755 LOWER CASE NO.: 15-29248 CA (24) RECEIVED, 1/12/2017 2:42 PM, Mary Cay Blanks, Third District Court of Appeal VICTORIA
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 MERCURY INSURANCE COMPANY OF FLORIDA, Petitioner,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
Electronically Filed 07/24/2013 10:41:59 AM ET RECEIVED, 7/24/2013 11:38:37, Thomas D. Hall, Clerk, Supreme Court JAMON A. JOHNSON and CHAKA JOHNSON, IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Petitioners, v. L.
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 informationSUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC U.S. SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, vs. CARMEN MARIA CONTRERAS, ETC., Respondent.
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC06-1259 U.S. SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, vs. CARMEN MARIA CONTRERAS, ETC., Respondent. Express & Direct Conflict Jurisdiction Fourth District Court of Appeal
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. SC d DCA CASE NO. 3D05-951
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC06-283 3d DCA CASE NO. 3D05-951 BRASS & SINGER, P.A., (a/o/a Mildred Solages) vs. Petitioner, UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent. / PETITIONER=S
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No.: SC E. MARIE BOTHE, Petitioner, -vs- PAMELA JEAN HANSEN. Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No.: SC09-901 E. MARIE BOTHE, Petitioner, -vs- PAMELA JEAN HANSEN Respondent. ON PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL, SECOND DISTRICT
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 informationNOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT SERENITY HARPER, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-4987 )
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NUMBER SC04-586
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NUMBER SC04-586 STELLA ALEXANDER, etc., vs. Petitioner, PENSKE LOGISTICS, INC., et al., Respondents. DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE THIRD DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL JURISDICTIONAL
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE Case No.: SC INSURANCE COMPANY, L.T. No.: 5D
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE Case No.: SC03-1483 INSURANCE COMPANY, L.T. No.: 5D01-3851 Petitioner, vs. SHANNON NICHOLS, Respondent. / REPLY BRIEF OF PETITIONER KENNETH
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 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 informationentered an order denying the motion for reconsideration, rehearing and
SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 13-9999 DANNY'S BACKHOE SERVICE, LLC, Appellant/Petitioner, First District Court of Appeals -vs- Case No. 1D12-5142 AUTO OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee/Respondent.
More informationJ. Nels Bjorkquist of Broad and Cassel, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA USCARDIO VASCULAR, INCORPORATED, Appellant, v. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No. SC On Petition for Discretionary Review Of a Decision of The First District Court of Appeal
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. SC04-957 On Petition for Discretionary Review Of a Decision of The First District Court of Appeal RISCORP INSURANCE COMPANY, RISCORP PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE
More informationSUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA. Petitioner, CASE NO.: SC vs. Lwr Tribunal: 1D
SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA JACQUELINE DUPREY, Petitioner, CASE NO.: SC07-396 vs. Lwr Tribunal: 1D05-3340 LA PETITE ACADEMY and GALLAGHER BASSETT, Respondent. / PETITIONER S INITIAL
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT January Term 2014
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT January Term 2014 ROBERTO SOLANO and MARLENE SOLANO, Appellants, v. STATE FARM FLORIDA INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. No. 4D12-1198 [May 14,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. SC MONROE COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER, VS.
Electronically Filed 06/03/2013 04:07:50 PM ET RECEIVED, 6/3/2013 17:38:45, Thomas D. Hall, Clerk, Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. SC13-419 RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. CASE NO. SC LOWER TRIBUNAL NUMBER 3D Circuit Court Case No
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC08-1922 LOWER TRIBUNAL NUMBER 3D07-299 Circuit Court Case No. 00-19074 AVIOR TECHNOLOGIES, INC. and GEM CITY AVIATION, INC. d/b/a AVTECH EXECUTIVE FLIGHT CENTER,
More informationCASE NO. 1D Roy W. Jordan, Jr., of Roy W. Jordan, Jr., P.A., West Palm Beach, for Appellant.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA SUSAN GENA, v. Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED CASE NO. 1D11-1783
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT STATE OF FLORIDA MOTION FOR REHEARING
E-Copy Received Feb 11, 2013 4:49 PM IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT STATE OF FLORIDA CASEY MARIE ANTHONY, Petitioner, vs. DCA NO.: 5D11-2357 STATE OF FLORIDA Respondent, / MOTION
More information2015 IL App (5th) U NO IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIFTH DISTRICT
NOTICE Decision filed 01/27/15. The text of this decision may be changed or corrected prior to the filing of a Peti ion for Rehearing or the disposition of the same. 2015 IL App (5th) 120442-U NO. 5-12-0442
More informationLower Case No CC O
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY, Appellant, Case No. 2016-CV-000038-A-O Lower Case No. 2015-CC-009396-O v. CENTRAL FLORIDA
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 informationOF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT
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. 2003 MAGNETIC IMAGING SYSTEMS, ** I, LTD.,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA STATE OF FLORIDA, : SUPREME COURT NO.: SC06-2428 : Petitioner, : FLA. 2d DCA v. : CASE NO.: 2D05-1780 : MELVIN STACY JENKINS, : HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CIR. CT. : CASE NO.:
More informationARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION III No. CV-13-457 KENT SMITH, D.V.M., Individually and d/b/a PERRY VET SERVICES APPELLANT V. KIMBERLY V. FREEMAN and ARMISTEAD COUNCIL FREEMAN, JR. APPELLEES Opinion
More information