IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
|
|
- Lewis Ross
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA PERRY TANKSLEY, Petitioner, vs. 214 MAIN STREET CORP. and 3B REALTY NORTH, INC., Sup. Ct. Case No: SC Second DCA Case No: 2D Respondents. *********************************/ PETITIONER S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION ON REVIEW FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL, SECOND DISTRICT JOHN S. JAFFER SUSAN J. SILVERMAN Fla. Bar No: Fla. Bar No: S. Orange Avenue 3400 S. Tamiami Trail Suite 1 Second Floor Sarasota, Florida Sarasota, Florida Tel: (941) Tel: (941) Fax: (941) Fax: (941) Co-Counsel for Petitioner Co-Counsel for Petitioner
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Table of Contents i - ii Table of Citations..... iii Introduction Statement of the Case and Facts Summary of Argument Argument Preliminary Argument POINT I THE SECOND DISTRICT S DECISION EXPRESSLY AND DIRECTLY CONFLICTS WITH DECISIONS FROM OTHER DISTRICT COURTS OF APPEAL WHICH HELD THAT SUBSTANTIAL, NOT PERFECT, COMPLIANCE WITH ORDERS REQUIRING RENT PAYMENTS TO BE MADE INTO THE COURT REGISTRY WAS SUFFICIENT TO AVOID A DEFAULT POINT II THE SECOND DISTRICT S DECISION EXPRESSLY AND DIRECTLY CONFLICTS WITH DECISIONS FROM THIS COURT AND OTHER DISTRICT COURTS OF APPEAL WHICH HELD THAT DURING THE COURSE OF A LAWSUIT, THE TRIAL COURT HAS THE INHERENT AUTHORITY TO SET ASIDE INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS PRIOR TO ENTRY OF A FINAL JUDGMENT POINT III THE SECOND DISTRICT S DECISION EXPRESSLY AND DIRECTLY CONFLICTS WITH A DECISION FROM THIS COURT WHICH HELD THAT IN PROCEDURAL MATTERS, A RULE OF PROCEDURE PREVAILS OVER A STATUTE.. 9 i
3 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT D.) PAGE Conclusion Certificate of Service Certificate of Compliance ii
4 CASES TABLE OF CITATIONS PAGE Aravena v. Miami-Dade County, 928 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 2006)... Bettez v. City of Miami, 510 So.2d 1242 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)... Duss v. Duss, 92 Fla. 1081, 111 So. 382 (Fla. 1926)... First Hanover v. Vazquez, 848 So.2d 1188 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)... Freedman v. Geiger, 314 So.2d 189 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)... Gibbs v. Ewing, 94 Fla. 236, 113 So. 730 (Fla. 1927)... Howarth v. City of Deland, 117 Fla. 692, 158 So. 294 (Fla. 1934)... K.D. Lewis Enterprises Corporation v. Smith, 445 So.2d 1032 (Fla.5 th DCA 1984) TGI Friday s, Inc. v. Dvorak, 663 So.2d 606 (Fla. 1995)... Whitlock v. Drazinic, 622 So.d 142 (Fla. DCA 1993) OTHER AUTHORITIES , , 9.. 3, 5, 6, 7. 3, 5, 6, 7.. 4, , 5, 6, , 9. 4, 9 Fla. R. Civ. P (2005)... Fla. R. Civ. P (d)(2005)... Fla. R. Civ. P (2005) (5)(2005) (2)(1974)... iii.. 4, , 9.. 4, 9.. 4, 6, 9. 6
5 INTRODUCTION This Brief is filed on behalf of Petitioner, PERRY TANKSLEY, referred to herein as TANKSLEY, Petitioner, or Tenant. Respondents, 214 MAIN STREET CORP. and 3B REALTY NORTH, INC., will be referred to as Respondents, 214 and 3B, or Landlords. The Appendix to Petitioner s Brief on Jurisdiction will be referred to as (App.) followed by a document number. Unless otherwise indicated, all emphasis has been provided by counsel. as follows: STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS The pertinent facts, as recited in the Second District Court of Appeal s opinion, are This action arises out of a dispute over the terms of a lease agreement regarding commercial property in Sarasota. Tanksley leased the property in In 2005 Tanksley filed a Complaint for Declaratory Judgment seeking construction of the terms of the lease agreement. The Landlords filed a counterclaim for eviction and damages, including unpaid rent. The Landlords later filed a motion to require Tanksley to pay rent into the court registry. After a hearing on that motion, on July 15, 2005, the trial court entered an order requiring Tanksley to deposit $ into the court registry by July 20, The order further required Tanksley to pay rent that accrues during the pendency of this action into the court registry in the amount of $ per month payable in advance on the first (1 ) day of each calendar month. st Tanksley deposited $ into the court registry on July 20, 2005, representing the initial $ plus $ for August 2005 rent. Tanksley deposited $ into the court registry on September 8, 2005, which represented rent for September and October After Tanksley failed to pay the November rent into the court registry by the first of November, the Landlords filed on November 3, 2005, their Ex-Parte Motion for Default and Immediate Possession, citing section (5), Florida Statutes (2005). The motion was not served on Tanksley or Tanksley s attorney. 1
6 On November 9, 2005, the trial court, without giving prior notice to Tanksley, entered an Ex-Parte Order of Default for Immediate Possession, granting the Landlords motion and ordering the clerk to issue a writ of possession removing Tanksley from the leased premises. On November 14, 2005, the clerk of court issued a writ of possession, which was delivered by counsel for the Landlords to the Sarasota County Sheriff s Department. The order and the writ were sent to Tanksley and his attorney. Upon receipt of the order, Tanksley, on November 14, 2005, filed a Motion to Set Aside Default and Default Judgment. Tanksley asserted that after depositing two months rent in September, he had inadvertently marked his calendar to show the next deposit was due in December 2005 instead of November He requested the trial court to enter an order staying the writ of possession. The same day as the filing of Tanksley s motion to set aside default, on November 14, 2005, the trial court entered an Order Staying Writ of Possession, noting that Tanksley paid two months rent, for November and December 2005, into the court registry. The order stayed the writ until Tanksley s motion could be heard. Tanksley later filed an Amended Motion to Set Aside Default and Vacate Judgment; to Dissolve Writ of Possession; and for Sanctions. In his amended motion, he argued that the trial court s order should be vacated: (1) for lack of notice to him of the Landlords motion for default and immediate possession; (2) because waiver of defenses are extreme sanctions; (3) because Tanksley s failure to comply with the trial court s order was due to mistake, inadvertence, surprise, excusable neglect or the Landlords misconduct; and (4) because Tanksley had a meritorious defense to the Landlords claim for possession and damages. Tanksley also requested sanctions against the Landlords and their counsel. After a hearing, the trial court entered the Order Vacating and Setting Aside Default and Dissolving Writ of Possession, which is the subject of this appeal. The trial court determined that it had the discretion and authority to consider a meritorious argument concerning why the November payment was made later than the date provided in the court order. The trial court excused Tanksley from the requirement that the November rent be paid into the court registry on the first day of the month, and ordered that the default and the judgment for possession be set aside and the writ of possession be dissolved. The court denied Tanksley s request for 2
7 the imposition of sanctions. (App. 1). During the pendency of the appeal, Tanksley remained in possession of the property and paid rent into the court registry. On November 15, 2006, the Second District filed its opinion which reversed the trial court s Order and remanded for further proceedings, finding that the court had no authority to vacate the default whether or not it was the result of excusable neglect. TANKSLEY timely filed Motions for Rehearing, Rehearing En Banc and Certification. On January 19, 2007, the District Court denied the Motions. TANKSLEY filed a Motion to Stay Issuance of the Mandate which was denied by the District Court on February 9, On February 15, 2007, TANKSLEY filed an Emergency Motion in this Court for review of the Order Denying Motion to Stay Issuance of Mandate, which is still pending. TANKSLEY timely filed his Notice to Invoke the Discretionary Jurisdiction of this Court. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT The Second District s decision expressly and directly conflicts with the opinions of the Third and Fifth District Courts of Appeal in Freedman v. Geiger, 314 So.2d 189 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975), K.D. Lewis Enterprises Corporation v. Smith, 445 So.2d 1032 (Fla. 5 DCA 1984), and First Hanover v. Vazquez, 848 So.2d th 1188 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). (App. 2, 3, 4). Those opinions held that substantial compliance, as opposed to perfect compliance, by the Tenant with an order requiring payment of rent into the registry of the court was sufficient to avoid a default. 3
8 The decision also expressly and directly conflicts with the opinions of the Supreme Court in Gibbs v. Ewing, 94 Fla. 236, 113 So. 730 (Fla. 1927) and Duss v. Duss, 92 Fla. 1081, 111 So. 382 (Fla. 1926), and the Fifth and Third District Courts of Appeal in Whitlock v. Drazinic, 622 So.2d 142 (Fla. 5 DCA 1993) and th Bettez v. City of Miami, 510 So.2d 1242 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), which recognize the trial court s well-established authority to reconsider an interlocutory order at any time prior to entry of a final judgment. (App. 5, 6, 7, 8). Finally, the decision expressly and directly conflicts with the opinion of the Supreme Court in TGI Friday s, Inc. v. Dvorak, 663 So.2d 606 (Fla. 1995), which held that in procedural matters, a rule of procedure prevails over a statute. (App. 9). The District Court s decision failed to follow that precedent by necessarily holding that (5), Fla. Stat. (2005), a procedural statute, prevailed over Fla. R. Civ. P , and 1.500(d). The rules of procedure, respectively, require that notice of a motion for default must be given if a party has appeared and filed pleadings in the action, require service of every paper on each party in an action, and give the trial court authority to set aside a default. ARGUMENT Preliminary Argument This Court should exercise its discretion and accept jurisdiction in this case because the issues presented are of exceptional importance in light of the enormous amount of landlord tenant litigation in the County Courts statewide. Many of the cases involve orders to pay rent into the registry of the court. A 4
9 decision from this Court as to whether a trial court has the discretion to provide a tenant with an opportunity to come into substantial compliance with a courtordered payment schedule prior to the entry of a default will have a broad impact throughout the State of Florida. POINT I THE SECOND DISTRICT S DECISION EXPRESSLY AND DIRECTLY CONFLICTS WITH DECISIONS FROM OTHER DISTRICT COURTS OF APPEAL WHICH HELD THAT SUBSTANTIAL, NOT PERFECT, COMPLIANCE WITH ORDERS REQUIRING RENT PAYMENTS TO BE MADE INTO THE COURT REGISTRY WAS SUFFICIENT TO AVOID A DEFAULT. The Second District Court of Appeal held that under (5), Fla. Stat., the trial court does not retain discretion to excuse late payment of rent into the court registry based on a finding of excusable neglect. This holding is in direct and irreconcilable conflict with Freedman v. Geiger, 314 So.2d 189 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975), and the cases which interpret it, K.D. Lewis Enterprises Corp. v. Smith, 445 So.2d 1032 (Fla. 5 DCA 1984) and First Hanover v. Vazquez, 848 So.2d th 1188 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). In Freedman v. Geiger, an order was entered directing payment of rent into the registry of the court. The Tenant in Freedman failed to make one payment into the court registry and Landlord moved for a default. Prior to a hearing on the motion for default, the tenant deposited the funds into the registry of the court. The trial court issued the default anyway. On appeal, the Third District Court of Appeal reversed and set aside the default, finding the trial court abused its 5
10 discretion by granting the default. The appellate court relied on the Florida courts liberal policy of setting aside defaults to permit a trial on the merits. K.D. Lewis Enterprises Corp. v. Smith, 445 So.2d 1032 (Fla. 5 DCA th 1984), explained Freedman v. Geiger, supra, as follows: Id. at Freedman complied with the court order until the October payment was due. After his check for the October payment failed to clear, he deposited a new check into the court s registry. Thus, unlike the tenants here, Freedman was in substantial compliance with the court s order requiring payment of rent into the registry of the court. First Hanover v. Vazquez, 848 So.2d 1188 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003) also confirmed that Freedman v. Geiger correctly set aside the default because the tenants were in substantial compliance with the court ordered rental payments, particularly noting that the tenants had deposited additional sums into the registry prior to the hearing on the Landlord s motion for default. Although Freedman v. Geiger involved a residential tenant, and TANKSLEY is a commercial tenant, there is no material difference between 83.60(2), Fla. Stat. and (5), Fla. Stat (2) provides that in the absence of payment, the landlord is entitled to immediate default judgment for removal of the tenant (5) grants the landlord an immediate default for possession without using the term judgment. If there is a difference in meaning between the residential and commercial statutes, the residential section is harsher in its application against the tenant than the commercial section. Since both 6
11 statutes cover the same general field, courts should avoid a construction which places them in conflict. Howarth v. City of Deland, 117 Fla. 692, 158 So.2d 294 (Fla. 1934). One of the tests for conflict jurisdiction is whether the holdings of this case and those asserted to be in conflict are irreconcilable. If the court below reached the opposite result on controlling facts which, if not virtually identical, more strongly dictated the result reached by the alleged conflict case, a conflict of decisions exist that warrants accepting jurisdiction. Aravena v. Miami-Dade County, 928 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 2006). In the present case, the controlling statutes would seem to be virtually identical. The commercial statute, by granting the landlord of the commercial tenant only an immediate default for possession rather than an immediate default judgment for removal as set forth in the residential statute, if anything, more strongly dictates the result in Freedman v. Geiger, 314 So.2d 189 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975), K.D.Lewis Enterprises Corporation v. Smith, 445 So.2d 1032 (Fla. 5 DCA 1984), and First Hanover v. Vazquez, 848 th So.2d 1188 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). Contrary to the above-referenced decisions, the Second District refused to consider that TANKSLEY was in substantial compliance with the order requiring rental payments into the court registry. It also refused to consider that, aside from being tardy due to an inadvertent calendaring error, TANKSLEY had fully complied with the order to deposit rent in the registry before the hearing on the motion to set aside the default, and that the trial court found his tardiness to be the 7
12 result of, and to constitute, excusable neglect. It also failed to follow the established policy noted in the above decisions of liberality in setting aside defaults to permit a trial on the merits. In short, the District Court s decision is in express, direct and irreconcilable conflict with the above-cited cases, which hold that in making court-ordered payments into the court registry, a tenant must substantially, but not perfectly, comply. Where, as here, the tenant deposits rent prior to the landlords properly serving a motion for default, the trial court should deny the motion and vacate a default that was previously entered. Indeed, the record does not reflect that tenant was ever served with notice of the Ex Parte Motion for Default, even after serving the motion to vacate. To the contrary, he was alerted to its existence only upon the court s serving him with a copy of the order granting the Ex Parte Motion. POINT II THE SECOND DISTRICT S DECISION EXPRESSLY AND DIRECTLY CONFLICTS WITH DECISIONS FROM THIS COURT AND OTHER DISTRICT COURTS OF APPEAL WHICH HELD THAT DURING THE COURSE OF A LAWSUIT, THE TRIAL COURT HAS THE INHERENT AUTHORITY TO SET ASIDE INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS PRIOR TO ENTRY OF A FINAL JUDGMENT. The District Court s opinion results in a usurpation of the well-established authority of the trial court to revisit and set aside any prior interlocutory orders entered before a final judgment in the case is rendered. The trial court s decision to vacate the default and dissolve the writ of possession relied specifically on its authority and discretion to reconsider an interlocutory order at any time. The 8
13 opinion of the Court in the subject proceeding conflicts and is irreconcilable with Gibbs v. Ewing, 94 Fla. 236; 113 So. 730 (Fla. 1927); Duss v. Duss, 92 Fla. 1081, 111 So. 382 (Fla. 1926); Whitlock v. Drazinic, 622 So.2d 142 (Fla. 5 DCA 1993) th and Bettez v. City of Miami, 510 So.2d 1242 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). These decisions state the well-settled rule that during the course of a lawsuit, the trial court always has the inherent authority to set aside or modify interlocutory orders prior to final judgment. POINT III THE SECOND DISTRICT S DECISION EXPRESSLY AND DIRECTLY CONFLICTS WITH A DECISION FROM THIS COURT WHICH HELD THAT IN PROCEDURAL MATTERS, A RULE OF PROCEDURE PREVAILS OVER A STATUTE. The District Court s opinion in this case conflicts with the long-standing case law that holds in procedural matters, a rule of procedure prevails over a statute. In TGI Friday s, Inc. v.dvorak, 663 So.2d 606 (Fla. 1995), the Florida Supreme Court relied on this rule in concluding that the procedural portions of the 1991 version of Fla. Stat. Sec were superseded by Fla. R. Civ. P In the present case, the Second District necessarily held that (5), Fla. Stat. (2005), a procedural statute, governs over Fla. R. Civ. P , which provides that notice must be given of a motion for default if a party has appeared and filed pleadings in the action. This Court also necessarily held that the statute governs over Fla. R. Civ. P which requires service of every paper on each party in an action, and Fla. R. Civ. P (d), which gives the trial court authority to set aside a default. 9
14 CONCLUSION Based upon the foregoing arguments and citations of authority, Petitioner, TANKSLEY, respectfully requests that this Court accept jurisdiction to review the decision of the Second District Court of Appeal in this case. CERTIFICATE OF TYPEFACE COMPLIANCE I HEREBY CERTIFY that I have complied with the font standards required by Fla. R. App. P (a)(2) for computer-generated briefs, by submitting this brief in Times New Roman 14-point font. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been sent by facsimile and United States Mail, postage prepaid, to Adam Mohammadbhoy, Esq., Harllee & Bald, P.A., 202 Old Main Street, Bradenton, Florida 34205, on this 21 st day of February, /s/ /s/ JOHN S. JAFFER SUSAN J. SILVERMAN Fla. Bar No: Fla. Bar No: S. Orange Avenue 3400 S. Tamiami Trail Suite 1 Second Floor Sarasota, Florida Sarasota, Florida Tel: (941) Tel: (941) Fax: (941) Fax: (941) Co-Counsel for Appellee/ Co-Counsel for Appellee/ Petitioner Petitioner 10
CASE NO. SC ( ~ JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF
IN THE SUPREME COURT FOR CASE NO. SC ( ~ ATE OF FLORIDA L. T. CASE NO. 4D12-570 PALM BEACH MARKETPLACE, LLC, Petitioner, ALEYDA'S MEXICAN RESTAURANTE, INC., Respondent. JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF Jennifer S.
More informationIn the Supreme Court of Florida A.K. GIFT SHOP, INC., Petitioner,
In the Supreme Court of Florida CASE NO. SC12-362 A.K. GIFT SHOP, INC., Petitioner, v. DTRS INTERCONTINENTAL MIAMI, LLC, as Assignee of Intercontinental Hotels Corporation, Respondent. ON PETITION FOR
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA IN RE FORFEITURE OF: ONE 1988 LINCOLN TOWN CAR, VIN 1LNBM81F8JY612959 AND ONE 1986 LINCOLN TOWN CAR, VIN 1LNBP96F7GY660841 JOSEPH T. DEGREGORIO, Petitioner, vs. WILLIAM
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA PRO-ART DENTAL LAB, INC. Petitioner, V-STRATEGIC GROUP, LLC. Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC07-1397 PRO-ART DENTAL LAB, INC. Petitioner, v. V-STRATEGIC GROUP, LLC Respondent. RESPONDENT V-STRATEGIC GROUP, LLC S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION ON DISCRETIONARY
More informationSUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA JAMES LEVOY WATERS, Petitioner, SHERIFF, ESCAMBIA COUNTY FLORIDA, Respondent. CASE NO. SC
Electronically Filed 08/26/2013 04:20:02 PM ET RECEIVED, 8/26/2013 16:23:40, Thomas D. Hall, Clerk, Supreme Court SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA JAMES LEVOY WATERS, Petitioner, v. SHERIFF, ESCAMBIA COUNTY FLORIDA,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA. CASE NO. SC Third District Case Nos. 3D and 3D Lower Tribunal Case No.
Filing # 11177291 Electronically Filed 03/11/2014 10:18:49 AM RECEIVED, 3/11/2014 10:23:38, John A. Tomasino, Clerk, Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC14-263 Third District
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA. CASE NO. SC08- Fourth District Court of Appeal Case No. 4D JAN DANZIGER, Petitioner,
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC08- Fourth District Court of Appeal Case No. 4D06-5070 JAN DANZIGER, Petitioner, v. ALTERNATIVE LEGAL, INC., Respondent. ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW OF A DECISION
More informationSupreme Court of Florida
Supreme Court of Florida PER CURIAM. No. SC11-697 ROMAN PINO, Petitioner, vs. THE BANK OF NEW YORK, etc., et al., Respondents. [December 8, 2011] The issue we address is whether Florida Rule of Appellate
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC DCA CASE NO. 3D THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner, -vs- MAXIMILIANO ROMERO, Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC05-1141 DCA CASE NO. 3D03-2169 THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner, -vs- MAXIMILIANO ROMERO, Respondent. ON PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE DISTRICT COURT
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No. SC (Fourth DCA Case No. 4D )
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. SC11-452 (Fourth DCA Case No. 4D09-1690) MYRON ALPHESUS STANLEY, JR., Petitioner, vs. QUEST INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT, INC., Respondent. PETITIONER S AMENDED BRIEF
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA HOMER THOMAS, Plaintiff, Petitioner, CASE NO. SC04-111 LOWER CASE NO. - 4D02-3627 vs. SUBWAY RESTAURANTS, INC., Defendant, Respondent, / APPLICATION FOR DISCRETIONARY
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO: SC04- EDNA DE LA PENA, Petitioner, vs. SUNSHINE BOUQUET COMPANY and HORTICA, Respondents.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO: SC04- EDNA DE LA PENA, Petitioner, vs. SUNSHINE BOUQUET COMPANY and HORTICA, Respondents. PETITIONER S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION Richard Zaldivar, Esquire Jay M. Levy,
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 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 FLORIDA. v. CASE NO.: SC FIRST DCA CASE NO.: 1D L.T. CASE NO.: L
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA ROB BRAYSHAW, ET AL., Petitioners, v. CASE NO.: SC11-507 FIRST DCA CASE NO.: 1D09-5894 L.T. CASE NO.: 2009-1337L AGENCY FOR WORKFORCE INNOVATION, Respondent. / RESPONDENT
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL THIRD DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL THIRD DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA RECEIVED, 12/21/2016 10:21 AM, Mary Cay Blanks, Third District Court of Appeal SOLO AERO CORP., a Florida corporation, vs. Petitioner, AMERICA-CV
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. 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. Second District Court of Appeal Case Number: 2D L.T. No. 05-CA Parrot Cove Marina, LLC
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. Second District Court of Appeal Case Number: 2D06-4582 L.T. No. 05-CA-2397 Parrot Cove Marina, LLC Petitioner, vs. Duncan Seawall Dock & Boatlift, Inc. Respondent.
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 informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2008
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2008 JOHN F. BLANDIN, as Lessor, Appellant, v. BAY PORTE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., KEITH BEAN, STEFAN SEEMEYER, CHARLES SOUZA,
More informationDIRECTIONS FOR FILING A MOTION TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT IN DISTRICT COURT
DIRECTIONS FOR FILING A MOTION TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT IN DISTRICT COURT [If the default judgment comes from Small Claims Court, go to that court and ask the small claims clerk for information
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA ANTHONY FRANCIS, Petitioner, vs. CASE NO. SC07-1020 (L.T. CASE NO. 4D05-4542 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. PETITIONER=S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION On Review from the District
More informationFINAL ORDER REVERSING TRIAL COURT. Eviction entered June 2, 2014 in favor of Appellees, Herbert and Joann Greene ( the
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA SHALONDA E. WILKS, v. Appellant, CASE NO.: 2014-CV-000036-A-O Lower Case No.: 2014-CC-004299-O HERBERT GREENE and JOANN
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed July 02, 2014. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D13-461 Lower Tribunal No. 11-21566 Ocean Bank, Appellant,
More informationCASE NO. SC L.T. CASE NO. 4D IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CATHERINE STANEK-COUSINS, Petitioner, STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent.
CASE NO. SC05-1987 L.T. CASE NO. 4D05-1129 ========================================================== IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CATHERINE STANEK-COUSINS, Petitioner, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, 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. MIRACLE CENTER ASSOCIATES, etc., Petitioner,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC05-884 MIRACLE CENTER ASSOCIATES, etc., Petitioner, vs. SCANDINAVIAN HEALTH SPA, INC., etc., Respondent. ON APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA,
More informationIn the Supreme Court of Florida
In the Supreme Court of Florida CASE NO. SC06-1808 GARY DOEHLA, Petitioner, v. JAMES J. CLINTON, III, Respondent. ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE THIRD DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL PETITIONER S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner, vs. ERIC S. SMITH, Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC07-901 STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner, vs. ERIC S. SMITH, Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ON PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA JUNIOR JOSEPH, ) ) Appellee/Petitioner, ) ) 5th DCA Case No. 5D09-1356 ) ) Supreme Court Case No. SC11-179 STATE OF FLORIDA,) ) Appellant/Respondent. ) ) APPEAL
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC07-1672 PETER SPOREA, ET AL., Petitioners, vs. CITY OF POMPANO BEACH, FLORIDA, Respondent. RESPONDENT S AMENDED ANSWER BRIEF ON JURISDICTION On Appeal from the
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 informationCASE NO.: SC Discretionary Proceedings to Review a Decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal, State of Florida Case No.
THOMAS A. LEAHY, d/b/a ) FAR EAST ACCENTS, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) ) JAMES H. BATMASIAN, etc., ) et al., ) ) Respondents. ) ) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC07-1528 Discretionary Proceedings
More informationSUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No. SC04- L.T. Case No. 3D CITY OF MIAMI. Petitioner. vs. SIDNEY S. WELLMAN, ET AL.
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. SC04- L.T. Case No. 3D01-3050 CITY OF MIAMI Petitioner vs. SIDNEY S. WELLMAN, ET AL. Respondents RESPONDENTS ANSWER BRIEF TO PETITIONER S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION ON DISCRETIONARY
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 OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CARLOS VALDES v. Petitioner, SC Case: SC04-199 First DCA Case: 1D02-4026 INTEGRATED ADMINISTRATORS and WAL-MART STORE #6020, Respondent. / On discretionary review from the
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed January 23, 2019. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D18-583 Lower Tribunal No. 15-11310 Juan Carlos Musi,
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2013
CONNER, J. DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2013 MISHA ENTERPRISES, Appellant, v. GAR ENTERPRISES, LLC, Appellee. No. 4D11-3619 [July 10, 2013] In this commercial
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA APPEAL FROM THE THIRD DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS PETITIONER S JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CORAL BAY SECTION C HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, Petitioner. Case No.: 3D07-2315 MIAMI-DADE COUNTY Respondent Lower Tribunal Case No.: 2007-5354-CA-01 APPEAL FROM THE THIRD DISTRICT
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 informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC HARVEY JAY WEINBERG and KENNETH ALAN WEINBERG,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC 06-1941 BETTY WEINBERG, v. Petitioner, HARVEY JAY WEINBERG and KENNETH ALAN WEINBERG, Respondents. On Petition For Discretionary Review Of A Decision Of The
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2012
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2012 Opinion filed July 25, 2012. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. Nos. 3D11-2054 and 3D11-2053 Lower Tribunal
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA DIGICAST NEW MEDIA, INC., Petitioner, -vs- FIERA.COM, INC., Respondent. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SCO3-418 THIRD DISTRICT CASE NO. 3D02-441 LOWER TRIBUNAL NO. 01-24419 CA 22 DIGICAST NEW MEDIA, INC., Petitioner, -vs- FIERA.COM, INC., Respondent. APPEAL FROM
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 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 informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida, January Term, A.D. 2010
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, January Term, A.D. 2010 Opinion filed May 26, 2010. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D09-3235 Lower Tribunal No. 09-73755
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. Court of Appeal s Case No.: 4D JAN KRZYNOWEK, Petitioner, -vs- TZVI SCHACHTER
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. Court of Appeal s Case No.: 4D06-2266 JAN KRZYNOWEK, Petitioner, -vs- TZVI SCHACHTER Respondent. ON PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE FOURTH
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
Electronically Filed 05/20/2013 12:08:02 PM ET RECEIVED, 5/20/2013 12:08:39, Thomas D. Hall, Clerk, Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC13-782 L.T. Case Nos. 4DII-3838; 502008CA034262XXXXMB
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. CASE No. SC07-26 BRAD HIGGINBOTHAM. Petitioner. vs. TIMOTHY BOZEMAN. Respondent
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE No. SC07-26 BRAD HIGGINBOTHAM Petitioner vs. TIMOTHY BOZEMAN Respondent AMENDED RESPONDENT S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION Kenneth W. Sukhia FBN 266256 Conwell Sukhia & Kirkpatrick,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC ALVIN LEWIS, Petitioner. vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondents. PETITIONER'S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC05-1605 ALVIN LEWIS, Petitioner vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondents. PETITIONER'S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION Seeking Discretionary Review from the District Court of
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 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 THli SUPRiiMli COURT OF FLORIDA. CASH NO.: SCl ON REVIEW FROMTIIF DISTR[CTCOURTOI APPliAI. FIRST DISTRICL STATE OF FLORIDA
E]cctronically Filed 03/] I/2013 05:0]:34 PM ET RECE]VED.3/11/2Sl3 17:03:32, Thomas D. Hall, Clerk, Supreme Court IN THli SUPRiiMli COURT OF FLORIDA CASH NO.: SCl3-262 PÁl.MlTI~l O Bl.LFF PROPERTll-S.
More informationOF FLORIDA. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jerald Bagley, Judge. Knecht & Knecht and Harold C. Knecht, Jr., for appellant.
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. 2005 BEATRIZ L. LABBEE, Appellant, vs. JAMES
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. DAPHNE ELAINE HENSON, Florida Second District Court of Appeal Case Appellee. Number: 2D /
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA DOUGLAS LEE HENSON Appellant, Case Nos. SC06-1003 v. DAPHNE ELAINE HENSON, Florida Second District Court of Appeal Case Appellee. Number: 2D06-826 / APPELLEE'S BRIEF ON
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA DAVID M. POLEN, v. ROSA POLEN, Petitioner, Respondent. / CASE NO. SC06-1226 4 TH DCA CASE NO. 4D06-1002 AMENDED ANSWER BRIEF ON JURISDICTION Respectfully submitted, JOEL
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA AMENDED JURISDICTIONAL ANSWER BRIEF OF RESPONDENT STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CAPITAL COLLATERAL REGIONAL COUNSEL-MIDDLE REGION and JOHN W. JENNINGS, Petitioners. v. Case No. SC07-2447 LT Case No. 1D07-253 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES,
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 S. CT. CASE NO. SC
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA WILFRID METELLUS, Petitioner, S. CT. CASE NO. SC02-1494 vs. DCA CASE NO. 5D01-1044 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. / ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL,
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM Appellants, v. Case No. 5D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM 2009 SCOTT KRUEGER AND CYNTHIA KRUEGER, Appellants, v. Case No. 5D08-1880 PAUL E. PONTON, JR. AND MARLENE E. PONTON,
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 CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA LAS PALMAS AT SAND LAKE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., CASE NO.: 2014-CV-000038-A-O Lower Case No.: 2014-CC-001945-O
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA. PATRICK PALUMBO Petitioner, STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA PATRICK PALUMBO Petitioner, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. CASE NO. 5D08-1275 LOWER COURT NO. 05-CF-0006841-O APPELLANT S JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF ON REQUEST
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 COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE February 7, 2008 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE February 7, 2008 Session VALLEY VIEW MOBILE HOME PARKS, LLC. v. LAYMAN LESSONS, INC. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Sumner County No. 29509-C C. L.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC JOSE VALDES and JUANA VALDES, his wife, Petitioners, vs.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC06-971 JOSE VALDES and JUANA VALDES, his wife, Petitioners, vs. GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC., SOUTHERN UNDERWRITERS, INC., CAPITAL ASSURANCE SERVICES, INC.,
More informationSUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA
SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA DONALD M. MACLEOD AND KIM MACLEOD, Petitioners, v. CASE NO. SC08-825 L.T. No. 1D07-1770 ORIX FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., f/k/a ORIX CREDIT ALLIANCE, INC., Respondent. / JURISDICTIONAL
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA LESTER SMULL, Petitioner, CASE NO.: 4 TH DCA CASE NO.:4D02-1818 v. THE TOWN OF JUPITER, a Florida municipal corporation Respondent. / PETITIONER S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
More informationSUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC PUTNAM COUNTY, Petitioner, JOHN EDMONDS and MARY EDMONDS., Respondent.
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC12-1665 PUTNAM COUNTY, Petitioner, v. JOHN EDMONDS and MARY EDMONDS., Respondent. ON REVIEW FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIFTH DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA L.T.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF FLORIDA NEW TESTAMENT BAPTIST CHURCH, INCORPORATED OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, Petitioner, vs. CASE NO. SC08- STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Respondent. / JURISDICTIONAL
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA JOY CHATLOS D ARATA, etc., Petitioner, vs. Case No. SC04-2097 DCA Cases Nos. 5D02-3330 & 5D02-3590 (Consolidated Appeals) THE CHATLOS FOUNDATION, INC., et al. Respondents.
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 informationSUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. PETITIONER, CASE NO.: SC Lower Tribunal No.: 5D05- AMENDED PETITIONER S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA ELIAS MORALES, ET AL. 4295 vs. PETITIONER, CASE NO.: SC06-1322 Lower Tribunal No.: 5D05- LETICIA J. MARQUES, RESPONDENT. / AMENDED PETITIONER S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION Elias Morales,
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed July 12, 2017. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D16-1286 Lower Tribunal No. 12-19622 Building B1, LLC,
More informationJURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF RESPONDENT, I & E GROUP, INC.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA KATARINA LOIDL, Petitioner, Case No. SC06-992 v. DCA Case No. 2D05-3984 I & E GROUP, INC., and HARALD LOIDL Respondents. / JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF OF RESPONDENT, I & E GROUP,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA. ELIAS AND DAHLIA MORALES, Appellants, Case No.: SC DCA Case No.: 5D vs.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA ELIAS AND DAHLIA MORALES, Appellants, Case No.: SC06-1322 DCA Case No.: 5D05-4925 vs. LETICIA J. MARQUES, Appellee. / APPEAL FROM THE FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC CLEO LECROY, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC 07-1021 CLEO LECROY, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. RESPONDENT'S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION BILL MCCOLLUM Attorney General Tallahassee,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. v. Case No. SC- IAN MANUEL L.T. No. 2D ON PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM THE SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner, v. Case No. SC- IAN MANUEL L.T. No. 2D08-3494 Respondent. ON PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM THE SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC12- DEMARIOUS CALDWELL, Petitioner, - versus - STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC12- DEMARIOUS CALDWELL, Petitioner, - versus - STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. ON APPEAL FROM THE FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL CASE NO. 4D10-3345 RESPONDENT
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner, vs. JORGE LUIS DOMINGUEZ, Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner, vs. JORGE LUIS DOMINGUEZ, Respondent. ON PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD DISTRICT BRIEF
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC LOWER TRIBUNAL CASE NO.: 4D
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC06-2349 LOWER TRIBUNAL CASE NO.: 4D05-3911 THOMAS D. LARDIN, P.A., a Florida Professional Association and THOMAS D. LARDIN, ESQUIRE, Defendant/Petitioners, v.
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D., 2009
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D., 2009 Opinion filed December 2, 2009. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D08-3084 Lower Tribunal No.
More informationIN Tl le SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF FLORIDA. CASE NO. SCl3-153 L. T. CASR NOS.; 4DI J-4801, CA COCE
E]cctronically Filed 07/01/2013 (M:47:23 PM ET RECEIVED. 7/]/2013 l6:48:35. Thomas D. Hall. Clerk. Supreme Court IN Tl le SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SCl3-153 L. T. CASR NOS.; 4DI J-4801,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA KEITH R. HARRIS, DC# 635563 Petitioner, vs. Case No. SC08-1367 L.T. No. 1D06-5125 THE FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondent. / RESPONDENT'S AMENDED BRIEF ON JURIDICTION
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. Petitioner, FSC CASE NO.: SC DCA CASE NO.: 2D
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA SUNSET COVE INVESTMENTS, INC., Petitioner, FSC CASE NO.: SC08-709 DCA CASE NO.: 2D07-1598 BENITO G. SANTIAGO, Respondent. / ON PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. S.CtCaseNo.: D.C.A. Case No.: 1D MARK ALLEN BIR. Petitioner. STATE OF FLORIDA Respondent
/>. A, PROVIDED TO CROSS CITY C.I. ON MAY 0 5 FOR MAI IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA S.CtCaseNo.: D.C.A. Case No.: 1D10-6806 A \ MARK ALLEN BIR Petitioner v. STATE OF FLORIDA Respondent On Discretionary
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA RESPONDENT S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF FLORIDA JANET B. STROMMEN, n/k/a JANET PUENTES, Petitioner/Former Wife, and Case No.: SC06-1085 PAUL STROMMEN Respondent/Former Husband. / RESPONDENT S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION
More informationN0. SC [LOWER TRIBUNAL NOS. 3D ] In the Supreme Court of Florida TRUST CARE HEALTH SERVICES, INC., AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION,
N0. SC11-353 [LOWER TRIBUNAL NOS. 3D09-2568] In the Supreme Court of Florida TRUST CARE HEALTH SERVICES, INC., Petitioner/Appellant, v. AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, Respondent/Appellee. On Appeal
More informationWrit of Possession. Legal Services of Greater Miami, Inc. Tenants Rights Project
Writ of Possession Legal Services of Greater Miami, Inc. Tenants Rights Project Renters Education and Advocacy Legal Lines (REAL) https://sites.google.com/site/reallsgmi www.lsgmi.org WHAT IS A WRIT OF
More informationIN THE SUPREME OF FLORIDA RESPONDENT S ANSWER BRIEF ON JURISDICTION ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM A DECISION OF THE FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
IN THE SUPREME OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC06-88 4DCA CASE NO.: 4D 04-1350 MICHAEL GLYNN vs. Petitioner, FIRST UNION NATIONAL BANK, Respondent. / RESPONDENT S ANSWER BRIEF ON JURISDICTION ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Third District Court of Appeal Case No. 3D09-1314 Lower Court Case No. 08-39632 CA 04 (11 th Judicial Circuit) VENEZIA LAKES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida not-for-profit
More informationFINAL ORDER REVERSING IN PART AND AFFIRMING IN PART TRIAL COURT
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: 2014-CV-000020-A-O Lower Case No.: 1998-SC-003407-O JAMES B. BALLOU, v. Appellant, DIANA SCHMIDT, Appellee.
More informationNO SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA WALTER WEISENBERG. Petitioner, vs. COSTA CROCIERE, S.p.A. Respondent.
NO. 10-1256 SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA WALTER WEISENBERG Petitioner, vs. COSTA CROCIERE, S.p.A. Respondent. On Appeal From the Third District Court of Appeal LT Case No(s): 3D07-555; 04-23514 PETITIONER
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
SCOTT KATZMAN, M.D. and ADVANCED ORTHOPAEDICS, P.A., IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Petitioners, Case No. SC12-114 v. 4 th DCA Case No. 4D11-1290 REDIRON FABRICATION, INC. GEORGE MARTIN and ALLISON MINJARES,
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 informationORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI. Petitioners seek certiorari review of a non-final order of possession removing
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA HOLLY D. MORGAN and DANIEL E. SPRINGEN, APPELLATE CASE NO: 2015-CA-729-O Lower Case No. 2014-CC-596-O Petitioners, v.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC DCA CASE NO. 3D VINCENT MARGIOTTI. Petitioner, -vs- STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC03-2290 DCA CASE NO. 3D02-2862 VINCENT MARGIOTTI Petitioner, -vs- STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. ON PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF
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 information