IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No. SCO LYNN HILLMAN, MARY PATRICIA BOSNER and ROBERTA JAMES, Petitioners,
|
|
- Monica Rice
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. SCO5-284 LYNN HILLMAN, MARY PATRICIA BOSNER and ROBERTA JAMES, Petitioners, v. HCA HEALTH SERVICES OF FLORIDA, INC. d/b/a BLAKE MEDICAL CENTER, Respondent. RESPONDENT S JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF On Review from the District Court of Appeal, Second District, State of Florida Marie Tomassi, Esquire Florida Bar No TRENAM, KEMKER, SCHARF, BARKIN, FRYE, O'NEILL & MULLIS, Professional Association Bank of America Tower, Suite Central Avenue St. Petersburg, FL Phone: (727) Facsimile: (727) Attorneys for Respondent
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES...ii STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND OF THE FACTS...1 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT...3 ARGUMENT...3 I. THE SECOND DISTRICT S OPINION DOES NOT EXPRESSLY AND DIRECTLY CONFLICT WITH ALACHUA COUNTY V. CHESHIRE AND WILLIAMS V. ALBERTSON S, INC...4 II. THE SECOND DISTRICT DID NOT MISAPPLY THIS COURT S DECISIONS SO THAT NO CONFLICT EXISTS...5 CONCLUSION...10 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE...11 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE...11 i
3 Cases TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Pages Alachua County v. Cheshire, 603 So. 2d 1334 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)...4 Gandy v. State, 846 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 2003)...3 Hearndon v. Graham, 767 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 2000)... 5, 6, 8, 9 Hill v. Hill, 778 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 2001)...4 Kyle v. Kyle, 139 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 1962)...4 Machules v. Department of Administration, 523 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 1988)... 5, 7, 8, 9 Major League Baseball v. Morsani, 790 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 2001)... passim Mystan Marine, Inc. v. Harrington, 339 So. 2d 200 (Fla. 1976)...3 Reaves v. State, 485 So. 2d 829 (Fla. 1986)...1 Stallworth v. Moore, 827 So. 2d 974 (Fla. 2002)...1 State v. Klayman, 835 So. 2d 248 (Fla. 2002)...1 The Florida Star v. B.J.F., 530 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 1988)...4 ii
4 Williams v. Albertson's, Inc., 879 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)...4, 5 Miscellaneous Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure Art. V, sec. 3(b)(3), Fla. Const....3 Florida Statute section , 8, 9 iii
5 STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND OF THE FACTS In a brief on jurisdiction based on conflict of decisions, the only facts to be considered are those stated in the district court s opinion. State v. Klayman, 835 So. 2d 248, 250 (Fla. 2002) (the relevant facts are set forth in the district court opinion.... ). Even facts stated in a dissenting or concurring opinion are irrelevant. Stallworth v. Moore, 827 So. 2d 974, 977 (Fla. 2002). [I]t is pointless and mis leading to include a comprehensive recitation of facts not appearing in the decision below because the only facts relevant to whether to accept jurisdiction are those contained within the four corners of the decisions allegedly in conflict. Reaves v. State, 485 So. 2d 829, 830 fn.3 (Fla. 1986). Petitioners Statement of the Case and Facts improperly includes statements not found in the Second District opinion and excludes relevant portions of that opinion. 1 Respondent respectfully submits this Court should refer to the Second District opinion at issue herein for the actual facts relevant to the assertion of 1 For example, Petitioners claim to have filed their initial lawsuit after reporting violations of the law with respect to grossly substandard nursing care.... (Petitioners brief at p.1). The Second District decision does not contain this statement, one presumably made in an effort to prejudice this Court against Respondent. Similarly, Petitioners purport to characterize the motivation of Respondent in moving to dismiss the federal lawsuit for lack of jurisdiction, as well as to characterize the state court judge s thoughts and motivations in denying summary judgment. (Id. at p. 1-2). These statements are improper and should be disregarded.
6 conflict jurisdiction, as well as those facts omitted by Petitioners demonstrating the fairness of the outcome below. For example, Petitioners strongly suggest that Respondent somehow tricked them into missing their jurisdictional defect in federal court, despite their counsel s express concession that the doctrine of equitable estoppel does not apply in this case. Second District opinion at p. 4 fn.3. The Second District opinion, however, recounts the many ways in which Respondent repeatedly advised Petitioners that Respondent was not a foreign corporation, beginning with pre-suit correspondence and including thereafter an answer denying the complaint s jurisdictional allegations, denying the allegation that Respondent was a foreign corporation and raising the express affirmative defense of lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and an answer to an interrogatory expressly stating that Respondent was a Florida corporation. Second District opinion at pp As the Second District noted, all of these disclosures should have placed opposing counsel on notice that diversity jurisdiction did not exist. Second District Opinion at p. 7 fn.7. As the Second District opinion makes clear, the instant case does not involve equitable estoppel, but only the doctrine of equitable tolling. The Second District correctly concluded that equitable tolling could not be applied to allow Petitioners to pursue their claim after the statute of limitations expired in this civil action. 2
7 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT This Court lacks jurisdiction because there simply is no conflict between the Second District opinion in this case and any of the cases on which Petitioners rely. The Second District correctly recognized and applied existing precedent from this Court in reaching the decision below. The two district court of appeal cases on which Petitioners rely do not actually conflict with the instant case and are improperly characterized by Petitioners. Moreover, Petitioners tortured definition of tolling is contrary to this Court s prior decisions and simply wrong. The petition for review should be denied because this Court has no basis for conflict jurisdiction and review is not warranted. ARGUMENT The jurisdiction of this Court extends only to the narrow class of cases enumerated in Article V, Section 3(b) of the Florida Constitution. Gandy v. State, 846 So. 2d 1141, 1143 (Fla. 2003). See also Mystan Marine, Inc. v. Harrington, 339 So. 2d 200, 201 (Fla. 1976) ( Time and again we have noted the limitations on our review and we have refused to become a court of select errors. ). Conflict jurisdiction is limited to decisions that expressly and directly conflict with a decision of another district court of appeal or of the Supreme Court on the same question of law. See Art. V, sec. 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. Conflict exists only if the same issue of law is decided and the cases are not factually 3
8 distinguishable. See Kyle v. Kyle, 139 So. 2d 885, 887 (Fla. 1962). The conflict must appear within the four corners of the decision brought up for review. See Hill v. Hill, 778 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 2001). Absent a conflict, this Court lacks jurisdiction to review the district court s decision. See The Florida Star v. B.J.F., 530 So. 2d 286, (Fla. 1988). I. THE SECOND DISTRICT S OPINION DOES NOT EXPRESSLY AND DIRECTLY CONFLICT WITH ALACHUA COUNTY V. CHESHIRE AND WILLIAMS V. ALBERTSON S, INC. Petitioners lead argument asserts that the Second District opinion conflicts with Alachua County v. Cheshire, 603 So. 2d 1334, 1337 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) and Williams v. Albertson s, Inc., 879 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). There is no conflict between these decisions, however, because neither case stands for the proposition that equitable tolling can be applied in a civil action, despite Petitioners assertions to the contrary. In Alachua County v. Chesire, 603 So. 2d at 1334, the First District held that equitable estoppel precluded Alachua County from raising a statute of limitations defense. Although that decision loosely refers to the doctrine of equitable estoppel and/or equitable tolling, id. at 1335, the entirety of the discussion and the basis of the court s decision rests solely on equitable estoppel based on the county s repeated oral and written representations to the opposing party. Alachua County cannot be fairly characterized as making any holding in regard to the 4
9 application of equitable tolling in a civil action, but instead is a mere recitation of the well-recognized rule that equitable estoppel can be applied to prevent a defendant from raising the statute of limitations defense. In Williams v. Albertson s, Inc., 879 So. 2d at 657, the Fifth District never addressed whether equitable tolling could apply in a civil action because the Court first determined that the facts of the case did not fit within those facts required even to invoke the equitable tolling doctrine in the first instance. Williams does not address, in any manner, whether equitable tolling could apply as a matter of law in a civil action. Thus, on the face of that opinion and the instant decision, there simply is no express and direct conflict. II. THE SECOND DISTRICT DID NOT MISAPPLY THIS COURT S DECISIONS SO THAT NO CONFLICT EXISTS. Petitioners assert as the second basis for a finding of express and direct conflict that the instant decision from the Second District misapplies this Court s holdings in Hearndon v. Graham, 767 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 2000), Major League Baseball v. Morsani, 790 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 2001) and Machules v. Department of Administration, 523 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 1988). Once again Petitioners are simply wrong, as the Second District opinion makes clear. The Second District recognized, correctly characterized and properly applied all three of these decisions in reaching the result below. 5
10 Petitioners argument turns, in short, on their assertion that these three Florida Supreme Court cases make clear a critical distinction between equitable tolling and tolling as set forth in Florida Statute section Petitioners argue that equitable tolling does not actually toll the statute of limitations but instead only excuses a late filing and that the three referenced cases demonstrate that this is a critical difference in regard to section Petitioners tortured analysis fails to recognize the very language used by this Court in these decisions, evidencing that doctrines affecting the duration of the statute of limitations once it has begun to run are precluded unless enumerated in Florida Statute section , whereas doctrines that delay the beginning of the statute of limitations (for example, accrual in Hearndon) or that operate on a party by preventing the assertion of the statute of limitations defense (estoppel in Morsani) are not precluded by the statute. For example, in Hearndon, this Court stated that the tolling of a limitation period would interrupt the running thereof subsequent to accrual.... Furthermore, the tolling statute specifically precludes application of any tolling provision not specifically provided therein.... While accrual pertains to the existence of a cause of action which then triggers the running of a statute of limitations, tolling focuses directly on limitations periods and interrupting the running thereof. Hearndon v. Graham, 767 So. 2d at
11 As this Court further noted in Major League Baseball v. Morsani, 790 So. 2d at 1077, tolling operates on the statute of limitations; equitable estoppel operates on the party. The Morsani Court explained that equitable estoppel does not toll anything because it simply bars a party from asserting a right that the party otherwise would be entitled to assert. In a footnote, the Court recognized that equitable tolling, which involves no misconduct on the part of the defendant, may delay the running of the limitations period.... Id. at fn.11. In the instant case, Petitioners assert that equitable tolling merely excuses a late filing. In reality, however, equitable tolling operates on the statute of limitations by delaying its running or extending its ending date to accommodate a late filing. There simply is no other way to characterize equitable tolling except as a doctrine operating on the statute of limitations after it has started to run as opposed to operating on a party or delaying the start of the time period. As the Morsani Court later noted, tolling is concerned with the circumstances in which the running of the limitations period may be suspended while equitable estoppel operates on a defendant without regard to the running of the limitations period provided by statute. Id. at Although Petitioners also rely on an alleged misapplication of Machules v. Department of Administration, 523 So. 2d at 1132, Machules clearly is limited to applying equitable tolling in administrative proceedings and cannot serve as a basis for conflict with the instant decision. 7
12 The Second District opinion expressly addresses each of the cases on which Petitioners rely, correctly explaining their holdings and relationship to the instant decision. For example, the Second District discusses Machules and ultimately concludes that, because Machules was limited to Florida administrative proceedings, it did not address application of the doctrine [equitable tolling] to toll a statute of limitation governed by the provisions of Chapter 95, Florida Statutes. Second District opinion at p. 9. The Second District properly characterized Machules and simply declined to expand its holding to such cases. Id. at p. 8. The Second District similarly addressed both Hearndon and Morsani, which the court found to be examples of deference by this Court to the legislature s expressed intentions in Florida Statute section In discussing Hearndon, the Second District correctly noted that this Court determined that the delayed discovery doctrine may only be applied to the accrual of a cause of action. Second District opinion at p. 12. The Second District noted language in Hearndon regarding Florida Statute section s preclusion of any additional tolling provisions not specifically set forth therein. The Second District also addressed Morsani, noting that the decision recognized the exclusive list of conditions that can toll the running of the statute of limitations in section , but concluded that the statute does not prohibit 8
13 application of the doctrine of equitable estoppel because equitable estoppel is a common law doctrine that does not toll anything. Second District opinion at p. 13. Once again the Second District opinion demonstrated a correct understanding and application of this Court s precedent. Petitioners have failed to demonstrate any express and direct conflict between the Second District opinion and any decision of this Court. The Second District did not misapply existing precedent, nor did it confuse the meaning of tolling either in consideration of Florida Statute section or equitable tolling. Petitioners assertion that the equitable tolling doctrine is not actually a tolling provision must be rejected. Indeed, in Morsani, this Court referred to equitable tolling as a doctrine that operates to toll the running of the limitations period when characterizing the holding of Machules. Morsani, 790 So. 2d at 1077 fn.11. As further language in both Morsani and Hearndon make clear, because equitable tolling operates to affect the running of the actual statute of limitations time period, whether stated as a tolling or as an excusing of a late filing or in any other way that operates to allow that period to be extended, it is in effect a tolling doctrine and its application to civil actions is precluded by statute. 3 3 This result is not unfair or inequitable. The Florida legislature has determined the conditions under which equitable tolling should apply and has 9
14 CONCLUSION Petitioners have failed to demonstrate express and direct conflict between the Second District opinion and any existing district court of appeal or Florida Supreme Court case. Instead, the Second District expressly recognized the Florida Supreme Court cases on which Petitioners rely, correctly characterized those decisions and correctly applied them. In the absence of an express and direct conflict, this Court is without jurisdiction and Petitioners petition for review should be denied. Respectfully submitted, Marie Tomassi, Esquire Florida Bar No TRENAM, KEMKER, SCHARF, BARKIN, FRYE, O'NEILL & MULLIS, Professional Association Bank of America Tower, Suite Central Avenue St. Petersburg, FL Phone: (727) Facsimile: (727) Attorneys for Respondent expressly rejected the use of any additional tolling provisions or the adoption of a savings statute. The Florida Supreme Court has not adopted a rule to address actions improvidently filed in federal rather than state court and the doctrine of equitable estoppel remains viable to protect plaintiffs from bad conduct by defendants that should preclude reliance on a statute of limitations defense. 10
15 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Respondent s Jurisdictional Brief has been furnished by U.S. mail to Tricia B. Valles, Esquire, Morgan, Lamb, Goldman & Valles, P.A N. Rocky Point Drive, Ste. 410, Tampa, FL 33607; Lisa L. Cullaro, Esquire, Lisa L. Cullaro, P.A. P.O. Box , Tampa, FL 33688; and to Debra M. Metzler, Esquire, Newman, Levine & Metzler, P.A., 400 N. Tampa Street, Suite 2900, Tampa, FL 33602, on March, Marie Tomassi, Esquire CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE I hereby certify that this brief complies with the font requirements set forth in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure Marie Tomassi 11
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT HCA HEALTH SERVICES OF ) FLORIDA, INC., d/b/a BLAKE MEDICAL )
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA ON PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM A DECISION OF THE SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL, STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO.
LARSON & LARSON, P.A., HERBERT W. LARSON, and H. WILLIAM LARSON, JR., IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Defendants/Petitioners, -vs- Sup. Ct. Case No. SC08-428 TSE INDUSTRIES, INC., Respondent. / ON PETITION
More informationBEFORE THE JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 09-01 INQUIRY CONCERNING A JUDGE NO. 09-01 RE: JUDGE N. JAMES TURNER S. Ct. Case No. 09-1182 / FLORIDA JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No. SC BEST DIVERSIFIED, INC. and PETER HUFF. Petitioners, vs.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. SC06-1823 BEST DIVERSIFIED, INC. and PETER HUFF Petitioners, vs. OSCEOLA COUNTY, FLORIDA and STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, Respondents.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC JOY CHATLOS D ARATA, etc., Petitioner, THE CHATLOS FOUNDATION, INC., et al., Respondents.
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC04-2097 JOY CHATLOS D ARATA, etc., Petitioner, v. THE CHATLOS FOUNDATION, INC., et al., Respondents. BRIEF OF RESPONDENTS ON JURISDICTION ON DISCRETIONARY
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA JAMES RICHARD COOPER, Appellant, v. Case No. SC11-341 STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FLORIDA, SECOND
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. CASE NO. SC (Lower Tribunal Case No. 3D07-818) MARTHA VALDEZ, Petitioner, vs.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC08-670 (Lower Tribunal Case No. 3D07-818) MARTHA VALDEZ, Petitioner, vs. HOMEOWNERS ASSISTANCE GROUP, LLC., A Florida limited liability company, Respondent. RESPONSE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC: L.T. Case No. 3D CASTELO DEVELOPMENTS, LLC. Petitioner, NAKIA RAWLS, et al. Respondents.
Electronically Filed 10/24/2013 05:29:35 PM ET RECEIVED, 10/24/2013 17:33:39, Thomas D. Hall, Clerk, Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA L.T. Case No. 3D12-1332 CASTELO DEVELOPMENTS, LLC Petitioner,
More informationCASE NO. SC DAVID M. SORIA, M.D., INPHYNET CONTRACTING SERVICES, INC. and TEAM HEALTH, INC., JURISDICTIONAL ANSWER BRIEF
IN THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT _ CASE NO. SC11-2050 DAVID M. SORIA, M.D., vs Petitioner. INPHYNET CONTRACTING SERVICES, INC. and TEAM HEALTH, INC., Respondents. On discretionary conflict review of a decision
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC04-338
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC04-338 R. BRENT MAGGIO, CRESTVIEW INVESTMENTS, INC., d/b/a CRESTVIEW NURSING AND CONVALESCENT HOME, FT. WALTON BEACH INVESTMENTS, INC., d/b/a FT. WALTON BEACH
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. v. Case No. SCO5-938 Lower Case No. 3D RESPONDENT'S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA ROCCO NAPOLITANO Petitioner, v. Case No. SCO5-938 Lower Case No. 3D04--318 STATE OF FLORIDA, Florida Department of Corrections Respondent. ================================================================
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA ANDERSON COLUMBIA and ) COMMERCIAL RISK MANAGEMENT, ) INC., ) ) Petitioners, ) ) Case No: SC05-1073 vs. ) ) JAMES BROWN, ) ) Respondent. ) ) ) ON PETITION FOR
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC LOWER TRIBUNAL NO. DCA: 3D AUNDRA JOHNSON, Petitioner, -vs- THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC09-966 LOWER TRIBUNAL NO. DCA: 3D07-2145 AUNDRA JOHNSON, Petitioner, -vs- THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. ON PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE DISTRICT
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA STERLING R. LANIER, JR. v. Petitioner, Case No. SC08-19 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. / AMENDED JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF RESPONDENT BILL MCCOLLUM ATTORNEY GENERAL TRISHA
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA MARK ONDREY, vs. Appellant/Petitioner, FLORENCE PATTERSON, as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN WILLIAM PATTERSON, deceased. Case No.: SC04-961
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY and AUTO-OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY Petitioners, CASE NO: vs. Lower Tribunal No. 2D01-5770 BILTMORE CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. and CENTRAL-ALLIED ENTERPRISES,
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 GREGORY L. WILLIAMS, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED Appellant, v. Case
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC CHRISTINE BAUER and THOMAS BAUER, Petitioners, ONE WEST BANK, FSB, Respondent.
Filing # 17071819 Electronically Filed 08/13/2014 05:11:43 PM RECEIVED, 8/13/2014 17:13:41, John A. Tomasino, Clerk, Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC14-1575 CHRISTINE BAUER and
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC11-352 THE VILLAS DEL VERDE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., Petitioner, vs. CLARK H. SCHERER, III, Respondent. ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE SECOND DISTRICT
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC THIRD DISTRICT CASE NO. 3D PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL GROUP, INC., A/A/O MARVELIS BAUZA, Petitioner,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC10-131 THIRD DISTRICT CASE NO. 3D09-771 PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL GROUP, INC., A/A/O MARVELIS BAUZA, Petitioner, vs. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, A Florida
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA RAMESES, INC., d/b/a CLEO S and STEVEN G. MASON, P.A., v. Petitioners, Case No.: SC10-670 Lower Tribunal: 5D09-208 JERRY DEMINGS, in his Official Capacity as Sheriff of
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA SUPREME COURT CASE NO.: SC11-734 THIRD DCA CASE NO. s: 3D09-3102 & 3D10-848 CIRCUIT CASE NO.: 09-25070-CA-01 UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. v. CASE NO. SC04-58 ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA ROBERT DEREK LEWIS, Petitioner, v. CASE NO. SC04-58 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. / ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA KEVIN TRACY. v. Petitioner, Case No. SC07-2057 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. / JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF RESPONDENT BILL MCCOLLUM ATTORNEY GENERAL TRISHA MEGGS PATE TALLAHASSEE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA ANDERSON COLUMBIA and * COMMERCIAL RISK * MANAGEMENT, INC., * * Petitioners, * * Case No.: SC05-1073 v. * * JAMES BROWN, * * Respondent. * * ON PETITION FOR
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. CASE NO.: SCl AIMEE OSMULSKI, L.T. Case No.: 2D L.T. Case No.: CI-11
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SCl2-1624 AIMEE OSMULSKI, L.T. Case No.: 2D10-5962 L.T. Case No.: 08-11945-CI-11 v. Petitioner, OLDSMAR FINE WINE, INC. a/k/a LUEKENS BIG TOWN LIQUOR, INC, d/b/a
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No.: SC Lower Tribunal No.: 1D ADAMS GRADING AND TRUCKING, INC. and JOHN M.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No.: SC07-1175 Lower Tribunal No.: 1D06-1760 ADAMS GRADING AND TRUCKING, INC. and JOHN M. BLOODSWORTH, Petitioners, vs. MICHAEL E. GRAY, Respondent. ON REVIEW FROM
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC11- THIRD DISTRICT CASE NO.: 3D UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY a Florida Corporation,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC11- THIRD DISTRICT CASE NO.: 3D10-108 UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY a Florida Corporation, Petitioner, -v- KENDALL SOUTH MEDICAL CENTER INC., & DAILYN
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D ) T.A.K., ) ) Appellee. ) )
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellant, v. Case No. 2D17-549 T.A.K., Appellee.
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT FLORIDA AMENDED RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT. Special Counsel to the Judicial Qualifications Commission
THE SUPREME COURT FLORIDA INQUIRY CONCERNING JUDGE No.: 06-425, JUDGE JAMES C. HAUSER / CASE NO.: SC07-983 AMENDED RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT Special Counsel to the Judicial Qualifications
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC LOWER TRIBUNAL CASE NO. 3D04-95 GROVE ISLE ASSOCIATION, INC., Defendant/Petitioner, vs.
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC05-1481 LOWER TRIBUNAL CASE NO. 3D04-95 GROVE ISLE ASSOCIATION, INC., Defendant/Petitioner, vs. IRENE ARDITI and MAURICE ARDITI, Plaintiffs/Respondents.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No. SC06-56 BEVERLY PENZELL AND BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Petitioners, vs.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. SC06-56 BEVERLY PENZELL AND BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Petitioners, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, Respondent. RESPONDENT S ANSWER BRIEF
More informationIN THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT
IN THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT ORLANDO LAKE FOREST JOINT VENTURE, a Florida joint venture; ORLANDO LAKE FOREST INC., a Florida corporation; NTS MORTGAGE INCOME FUND, a Delaware corporation; OLF II CORPORATION,
More informationSupreme Court of Florida
Supreme Court of Florida No. SC04-774 ANSTEAD, J. COLBY MATERIALS, INC., Petitioner, vs. CALDWELL CONSTRUCTION, INC., Respondent. [March 16, 2006] We have for review the decision in Colby Materials, Inc.
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida, January Term, A.D. 2009
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, January Term, A.D. 2009 Opinion filed February 18, 2009. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D08-676 Lower Tribunal No.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. v. Case No. SC STATE OF FLORIDA, DCA NO.: 2D
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA TODD A. HATFIELD, Petitioner, v. Case No. SC10-2404 STATE OF FLORIDA, DCA NO.: 2D09-5938 Respondent. 05-18908CFANO ON PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM THE SECOND DISTRICT COURT
More informationCASE NO. SC CORAL REEF DRIVE LAND DEVELOPMENT, LLC, etc. et al., DUKE REALTY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a foreign limited partnership,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC10-2367 CORAL REEF DRIVE LAND DEVELOPMENT, LLC, etc. et al., vs. Petitioners, DUKE REALTY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a foreign limited partnership, Respondent. On a
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. vs. L.T. NO.: 3D ON NOTICE TO INVOKE DISCRETIONARY JURISDICTION FROM THE THIRD DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CATHERINE RIGGINS Petitioner, CASE NO.: SC06-205 vs. L.T. NO.: 3D04-2620 AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK, Respondent. / ON NOTICE TO INVOKE DISCRETIONARY JURISDICTION FROM
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Petitioner, CASE NO. SC JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF RESPONDENT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA KENNETH JENKINS, v. Petitioner, CASE NO. SC04-2088 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF RESPONDENT CHARLES J. CRIST, JR. ATTORNEY GENERAL ROBERT R. WHEELER
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA PETITIONER'S JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CHARLES WILLIAMS, pro se, Defendant/Petitioner, CASE NO.: SC13- I v. 4th DCA NO.: 4D11-4882 STATE OF FLORIDA, PlaintifflRespondent. PETITIONER'S JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF On
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA RESPONDENT, CITY OF LARGO, ANSWER BRIEF ON JURISDICTION IN RESPONSE TO PETITIONER'S AMENDED BRIEF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA MARY KATHERINE DAY-PETRANO CASE NO. SC05-1181 L.T. 2D04-4867 Petitioner, v. PINELLAS COUNTY AND CIRCUIT COURTS OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF FLORIDA; STATE OF FLORIDA;
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. v. Case No: SC03-26 Lower Tribunal No: 2D DAVID C. McNEIL, RESPONDENT S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC., Petitioner/Defendant. v. Case No: SC03-26 Lower Tribunal No: 2D01-4547 DAVID C. McNEIL, Respondent/Plaintiff. / RESPONDENT S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA PETITIONERS BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA EXPEDIA, INC., ORBITZ, LLC and ORBITZ, INC., v. Petitioners, Case No. SC08-1536 L.T. Case No. 5D07-2787 ORANGE COUNTY and MARTHA O. HAYNIE, ORANGE COUNTY COMPTROLLER, Respondents.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC L.T. CASE NOS. 5D
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC12-1661 L.T. CASE NOS. 5D10-2410 FLORIDA INSURANCE GUARANTY ASSOCIATION, Petitioner, v. WHISTLER'S PARK, INC., a Florida Corporation Respondent. FLORIDA INSURANCE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF RESPONDENT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA WILLIAM MURPHY ALLEN JR., v. Petitioner, STATE OF FLORIDA, CASE NO. SC06-1644 L.T. CASE NO. 1D04-4578 Respondent. JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF RESPONDENT CHARLES J. CRIST, JR.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA. v. CASE NO. SC04-489
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA BIOMET, INC., a foreign corporation with its principal place of business in Warsaw, Indiana and licensed to do and be in business in Florida, and MIKE TRIESTE,
More informationRESPONDENT S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA TRUST CARE HEALTH SERVICES, INC., Petitioner/Appellant, CASE NO.: SC11-353 v. DCA NO.: 3D09-2568 STATE OF FLORIDA, AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, Respondent/Appellee.
More informationNOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT SANDRA GILL McDONALD, Petitioner, v. Case No. 2D11-3200 WILEY
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA WILLIAM E. WILLIAMSON, v. Petitioner, Case No. SC08-2192 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. / JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF RESPONDENT BILL MCCOLLUM ATTORNEY GENERAL TRISHA MEGGS PATE
More informationPREVIOUSLY FILED MOTION TO STRIKE THE JUDICIAL QUALIFICATION'S BRIEF FOR INCLUSION OF EXTRA-RECORD MATERIAL AND MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
Filing # 20161803 Electronically Filed 11/04/2014 10:48:48 AM RECEIVED, 11/4/2014 10:53:41, John A. Tomasino, Clerk, Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA BEFORE THE FLORIDA JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS
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 HERNANDO HMA, LLC, D/B/A BAYFRONT HEALTH
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. CASE No. 4DCA No. 4D LOREEN I. KREIZINGER, P.A., a Florida Professional Association, Petitioner,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE No. 4DCA No. 4D04-2919 LOREEN I. KREIZINGER, P.A., a Florida Professional Association, Petitioner, v. SHELDON J. SCHLESINGER, P.A., a Florida Professional Association,
More informationBEFORE THE FLORIDA JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION STATE OF FLORIDA
Filing # 17701401 Electronically Filed 08/29/2014 03:49:59 PM RECEIVED, 8/29/2014 15:53:38, John A. Tomasino, Clerk, Supreme Court BEFORE THE FLORIDA JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION STATE OF FLORIDA
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
Filing # 10750991 Electronically Filed 02/27/2014 10:29:07 AM RECEIVED, 2/27/2014 10:33:37, John A. Tomasino, Clerk, Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA LISA M. DETOURNAY, ) BRENDA RANDOL, and
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA RESPONDENT HENRY ANDREW HACSI S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA CYNTHIA MARTIN, vs. Petitioner, HENRY ANDREW HACSI, CASE NO.: SC05-1857 L.T. Case No.: 5D04-2807 Respondent. / RESPONDENT HENRY ANDREW HACSI S BRIEF
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEBBIE CARTER, individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KYLE MAK, deceased and survivors thereof, a minor, CASE NO. SC03-961 DCA CASE NO.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No. DCA No. 4D
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. DCA No. 4D10-2310 KENNEDY TRINLEY & SANTINO, P.L., a Florida limited liability company, and EARL MAYER, JR., Petitioners, v. BARBARA SHULGASSER-PARKER, as Personal
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. v. Case No. SC DISCRETIONARY REVIEW OF DECISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA JOSHUA ROSA, Petitioner, v. Case No. SC11-659 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. DISCRETIONARY REVIEW OF DECISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT JURISDICTIONAL
More informationSUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC11-2146 MARILYN ANN NUNES, Personal Representative of the Estate of KATHLEEN L. PHILLIPS and MARILYN ANN NUNES, individually Petitioners vs. ALLSTATE INVESTMENT PROPERTIES,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Petitioner, DCA CASE No. 5D v. CASE NO. SC ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA SAUL CARMONA, Petitioner, DCA CASE No. 5D03-229 v. CASE NO. SC STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. / ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL JURISDICTIONAL
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC DCA CASE NO. 3D JAMAR ANTWAN HILL, Petitioner, -vs- THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC08-929 DCA CASE NO. 3D06-468 JAMAR ANTWAN HILL, Petitioner, -vs- THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. ON PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE DISTRICT COURT
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC05-54 L.T. NO. 2D
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC05-54 L.T. NO. 2D03-1594 VANDERBILT SHORES CONDOMINIUM ASSOC., INC., VANDERBILT CLUB CONDOMINIUM ASSOC., INC., VANDERBILT LANDINGS, CONDOMINIUM ASSOC., INC.,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA. CASE NO. SC (4 th DCA 4D ) MALCOLM HOSWELL, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC05-1298 (4 th DCA 4D05-1624) MALCOLM HOSWELL, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. RESPONDENT'S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION LAURA FISHER ZIBURA
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 BRENT HUCK, Petitioner, v. CASE NO. SC04-2046 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. / ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF RESPONDENT
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA. v. Case No. SC Lower Court Case No. 1D
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA SHANDS TEACHING HOSPITAL AND CLINICS, INC., Petitioner, v. Case No. SC03-1656 Lower Court Case No. 1D02-1530 GARY JULIANA, II, a minor child, by and through his parents
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC FIRST DISTRICT CASE NO. 1D L.T. CASE NO CA WENDY HABEGGER, Petitioner, vs.
Filing # 11759404 Electronically Filed 03/26/2014 10:24:29 AM RECEIVED, 3/26/2014 10:28:40, John A. Tomasino, Clerk, Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC13-2506 FIRST DISTRICT CASE
More informationCASE NO. SC10- L.T. No. 3D GLK, L.P., a Washington limited partnership, and EMANUEL ORGANEK,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC10- L.T. No. 3D09-591 GLK, L.P., a Washington limited partnership, and EMANUEL ORGANEK, vs. Petitioners, FOUR SEASONS HOTELS LIMITED, a Canadian corporation,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA. Case No.: SC District Court Case No.: 4D CYBERKNIFE CENTER OF THE TREASURE COAST, LLC,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA Case No.: SC11-1914 District Court Case No.: 4D11-484 CYBERKNIFE CENTER OF THE TREASURE COAST, LLC, Petitioner, vs. HCA HEALTH SERVICES OF FLORIDA, INC. D/B/A
More informationSUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA
SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA FRANCIS D. PETSCH, CASE NO. SC04-917 Petitioner, v. ORKIN EXTERMINATING COMPANY, INC.; ROLLINS, INC; DAVID BERNSTEIN, individually, and RICK PROTHERO,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC INTERNATIONAL UNION OF POLICE ASSOCIATIONS, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC06-1148 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF POLICE ASSOCIATIONS, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. On Petition for Discretionary Review of the Opinion of the First
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC LOWER COURT NO.: 4D JACK LIEBMAN. Petitioner. vs.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC03-1896 LOWER COURT NO.: 4D00-2883 JACK LIEBMAN Petitioner vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. RESPONDENT'S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION CHARLES J. CRIST,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No.: SC11- ALBERTO G. DAVID, JR., Petitioner, vs. LORETTA L. DAVID, Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No.: SC11- ALBERTO G. DAVID, JR., Petitioner, vs. LORETTA L. DAVID, Respondent. On Review from the District Court of Appeal, Fifth District, State of Florida Case No.:
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA Supreme Court Case No. SC02-2736 5th DCA Case Nos.: 5D01-1662, 5D01-1663, 5D01-1664, 5D01-1665 & 5D01-3426 GREAT AMERICAN RESTAURANTS, INC., et al, v. Petitioners/Appellants,
More informationSUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA. v. CASE No. SC L.T. Case No. 1D BASIL D. FOSSUM, M.D. and DENNIS M. LEWIS, M.D.,
SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA BETH LINN and ANTHONY LINN, Petitioners, v. CASE No. SC05-134 L.T. Case No. 1D03-4152 BASIL D. FOSSUM, M.D. and DENNIS M. LEWIS, M.D., Respondents. / JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA. v. CASE NO. SC L.T. No.: CA 13
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA BEATRICE HURST, as Personal Representative of the Estate of KENNETH HURST, Petitioner, v. CASE NO. SC07-722 L.T. No.:04-24071 CA 13 DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Petitioner, Case No. SC JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF RESPONDENT PAMELA JO BONDI ATTORNEY GENERAL
Electronically Filed 06/27/2013 12:18:58 PM ET RECEIVED, 6/27/2013 12:23:39, Thomas D. Hall, Clerk, Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA JOHNNIE LEE REMBERT, v. Petitioner, Case No. SC13-1125
More informationIN THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT CASE NO. SC
IN THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT CASE NO. SC03-1242 IN RE: THE GUARDIANSHIP OF ) ) THERESA MARIE SCHIAVO, ) ) Incapacitated. ) ) ) ROBERT SCHINDLER and MARY ) SCHINDLER, ) ) Petition from the Second District
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA THE ESTATE OF MELISSA LEE NICHOLS, by and through TERRENA D. NICHOLS, Personal Representative, CASE NO.: SC 05-1832 DCA CASE NO.: 2D 04-3237 Plaintiff/Petitioner,
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION ALI JOSE LOPEZ, CLEMENCIA BARRIGA, GILBERTO
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA. CASE NO. SC (4th DCA Case No. 4D ) ALBERTO ELIAKIM, Petitioner, vs.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC04-2009 (4th DCA Case No. 4D02-3393) ALBERTO ELIAKIM, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. RESPONDENT'S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION CHARLES J.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC Fourth District Case No. 4DOI VIACOM INC., a Delaware corporation. Petitioner, vs.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC05-312 Fourth District Case No. 4DOI-4554 VIACOM INC., a Delaware corporation Petitioner, vs. JOHN M. TYSON Respondent. ON PETITION TO REVIEW A DECISION OF THE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA. Case No. SC BETTY JEAN MANN, Petitioner,
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA Case No. SC02-2646 BETTY JEAN MANN, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA and ORANGE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Respondents. PETITIONER
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC (Lower Tribunal Case No. 3D07-363) AHMAD ASAD, TONY GARCIA AND NOEL RIVERA, Petitioners, vs.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC12-653 (Lower Tribunal Case No. 3D07-363) AHMAD ASAD, TONY GARCIA AND NOEL RIVERA, Petitioners, vs. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY AND SGT. PATRICIA SEDANO, Respondents. ON
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CHARLES DAVID POPE, Petitioner, v. Case No. SC03-890 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. / Fifth DCA Case No. 5D02-3594 ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF
More informationSUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Tallahassee, Florida
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Tallahassee, Florida Appeal No: Fourth District Court Of Appeals No: 4D01-4655 ZC INSURANCE COMPANY, a foreign corporation, Petitioner/Plaintiff v. ANNIS BROOKS, individually,
More informationDESARROLLO INDUSTRIAL BIOACUATICO S.A. ( DIBSA ), E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY, PETITIONER S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA NO. L.T. No. 4D01-779 DESARROLLO INDUSTRIAL BIOACUATICO S.A. ( DIBSA ), Petitioner, vs. E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY, Respondent. On Petition for Discretionary Review
More informationPetitioner, CASE NO:73,465 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. RESPONDENT'S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA BENOIT BALTHAZAR, vs. Petitioner, CASE NO:73,465 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. RESPONDENT'S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION ROBERT A. BUTTERWORTH Attorney General Tallahassee, Florida
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC DISTRICT COURT CASE NO. 4D
Electronically Filed 10/09/2013 11:26:52 AM ET RECEIVED, 10/9/2013 11:28:34, Thomas D. Hall, Clerk, Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC2013-1834 DISTRICT COURT CASE NO. 4D11-3004
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA QUIETWATER ENTERTAINMENT, INC., ) FRED SIMMONS, MICHAEL A. GUERRA ) JUNE B. GUERRA, WAS, INC., and ) SANDPIPER-GULF AIRE INN, INC., ) ) Petitioners, ) CASE NO. SC05-215
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No. SC Third DCA Case Nos. 3D / 3D L.T. Case No CA 15
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. SC08-1877 Third DCA Case Nos. 3D07-2875 / 3D07-3106 L.T. Case No. 04-17958 CA 15 VALAT INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS, LTD. Petitioner, vs. MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC. Respondent.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC IN RE: THE ESTATE OF MARY T. OSCEOLA, Petitioners, vs. PETTIES OSCEOLA, SR.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC04-4059 IN RE: THE ESTATE OF MARY T. OSCEOLA, Petitioners, vs. PETTIES OSCEOLA, SR., Respondent APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC04- Lower Tribunal Case No.: 4D MANUEL CASTRO, Petitioner, ROGER BRAZEAU, Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC04- Lower Tribunal Case No.: 4D03-2073 MANUEL CASTRO, Petitioner, v. ROGER BRAZEAU, Respondent. ON PETITION FOP DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE DISTRICT COURT
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA GERTRUDE PATRICK, PETITIONER, v. CASE NO. SC11-1466 DCA CASE NO. 1D10-966 LIONEL GATIEN, DO., AN INDIVIDUAL, AND THOMAS E. ABBEY, D.O, AN INDIVIDUAL, RESPONDENTS. / RESPONDENT
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Jerome S. Rydell and Dale E. Krueger, individually and derivatively, on behalf of the shareholders of Surf Tech International, Inc., and Sigma Financial Corporation, a Michigan
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Petitioner, Case No. SC JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF RESPONDENT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA VERNON GOINS, v. Petitioner, Case No. SC06-356 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF RESPONDENT CHARLES J. CRIST, JR. ATTORNEY GENERAL ROBERT R. WHEELER
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC ANDREW MCKEE, Petitioner, vs. JURISDICTIONAL ANSWER BRIEF TOWER HILL SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY
Filing # 22727607 E-Filed 01/20/2015 12:24:06 PM IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC14-2299 ANDREW MCKEE, Petitioner, vs. TOWER HILL SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY, RECEIVED, 01/20/2015 12:28:38 PM,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA RESPONDENTS ENGLEWOOD COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND RSKCO S ANSWER BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA VICKI LUCAS, vs. Petitioner, ENGLEWOOD COMMUNITY HOSPITAL and RSKCO, CASE NO.: SC07-1736 L.T. Case No.: 1D06-5161 Respondents. / RESPONDENTS ENGLEWOOD
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA. vs. L.T. CASE NO.: 2D RESPONDENT S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA THE VILLAS DEL VERDE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., Petitioner, CASE NO.: SC11-352 vs. L.T. CASE NO.: 2D09-5547 CLARK H. SCHERER, III, Respondent. /
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. v. Case No. SC LCN: 4D STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT'S AMENDED BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA WILLIE FRANK DAVIS, Petitioner, v. Case No. SC09-192 LCN: 4D08-4272 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. RESPONDENT'S AMENDED BRIEF ON JURISDICTION BILL MCCOLLUM ATTORNEY GENERAL
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF RESPONDENT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner, v. Case No. SC10-2418 RANDY SCOTT RIESEL, Respondent. / JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF RESPONDENT NANCY A. DANIELS PUBLIC DEFENDER DAVID P. GAULDIN
More information